What do you think, which part of modeling a guitar signal chain is closer to reality?

My experience has been the amp sections are better. Reason being? Having to use external cab IRs or plugins like Recab for my amp sim plugins (like Ampltiube and Guitar Rig). Recently though IK has got their stuff together and their cab simulation sounds much better!

Depends, but I'd say amp. Using IRs and filters to simulate speakers works well enough, but misses the subtleties. Paper interacts; paper distorts; paper is nonlinear. IRs are flat and shallow, one-dimensional. Volterra kernels can totally capture a speaker, but other than AeternusEternus, who does this?

Many newer ampsims are quite good, much better than the simple waveshaper + EQ of the old days. The Koren equations may be oversimplified, but the devs are making some serious magic with them. Speaker simulation just hasn't leapt ahead like amp simulation.

Then again, most people don't really care about speaker interaction -- pretty much just us Neanderthals who stick to classic blues-rock. It's all good.

Easily the amplifier section (pre-amp and power amp) but that does not include stompbox pedals as personally I ain't that happy with most of them and to be honest I do not use Amp sim/emu plug-ins but instead use what my regular pedals, pre-amp, power-amp (and combos) setups available then take the power-amp's FX Loop send and put that into a desk/mixer/interface's line input then use Mic'd Speaker Cab Impulses along with some other processors that can give a power-amp type of feel. Also get really good results not using any Impulses but instead using a Ratt Electronics Dummy Loadbox (UK GBP £50 Something) along with a Radial JDX Box if not getting the microphones out and doing it the old/long way, Still even then it can/does I find help to combine the two/three options/aproaches

Rat dummy loadbox here: http://www.ratvalveamps.com/dummy-load
Radial JDX box here: http://www.radialeng.com/r2011/jdx.php

This is simply my own personal preferences after alot of trial of various setups and just 'work' for myself and my collegue the best and our needs/wants. YMMV or more likely will definately vary

Good luck and hope you find a setup that works best for your own needs/wants dude

Dean

Jafo made a very good point regarding the breakup of loud speakers and how much of a factor it can have on the outcoming sound. Basically guitar speakers are shit technically as all the breakup/modes are within the area totally opposite in the area that any proper loud speaker design for sound reproduction would ever want happening. To much to harp on about so here are a few links worth a read:

http://www.premierguitar.com/Magazine/Issue/2009/Jan/Control ling_Speaker_Breakup.aspx
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/feb12/articles/speakers.htm
http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/jan10/articles/speakers.htm

So yes indeed a set of impulses are not perfect at all and but a small part of what is really going on

For character of the sound I find the speaker emulation most important for electric guitar. And together with good miked cabinet emulation it makes all the difference.

Most speaker emulations does not cut it - they only have on/off axis position and a couple of mikes with slightly different frequency response.

I like Izotope Trash with the way it's done, but does not sound quite right. But you can freely move two mikes in the room to get the ambience you want.

Waves GTR3 can be used for some neat combination with two channels and delays on each etc. But it has some harschness about it. You can bypass amp and then get close to good.

Recabinet is interesting, but not quite there I think. They miss both ability to pan and shape the room from the two channels.

All amp sims I tried are toys, apart from the old goodie SimulAnalog Twin - which really build some fatness of even a lined guitar.

I will try Magix Vandal when it becomes x64. I have high hopes for that one.

For me it's all real tubes as preamps/amps that works.


p.s. Did anybody use Nebula - which has a clever way of using multiple IRs and morphing them to create non-linear emulations?

Are there any amp sims in there for guitar?

Hi there.

Do you know if they use a strict resistor load, or if they emulate the speaker coil somehow?

A resistor does not quite respond the way a speaker does.

I know some power soaks/dummy load use electric motor engine load to better emulate a speaker coil.

I have a Koch Studiotone which has an internal resistor and I'm curious to try something that also have reactive loads like coils.

thanks.

Mind you, RedWirez has certainly captured some real 'vibe' with their IRs. I like Guitar Rig 5 Pro with the included RedWirez IRs. Not perfect, but very good. For classic Fender tone, IK Multimedia's offerings are very, very good. I use the Amplitude freebie with a truck load of "Custom Shop" modules that I've purchased during sales.

I'm kinda surprised by the results, for me the "graininess" and "fizz" of preamp models, especially in hi gain ones, has always been the biggest problem. Of course I agree that IR's can't possibly emulate the air-pushing aspect of real cabinets, isn't an IR only slightly better than an EQ curve?

The Ratt Electronics is simply a box with a few massive resistors in it (for £55 though it is really good VFM/faultless really) but the Radial Engineering JDX box whilst not doing anything in the way of attenuating definately has got 'feel'/'response' when played/heard through just monitors (as in it feels 'reactive' I guess, Sounds different depending on the amp/cab combination). The Dummyload (box of resistors) is simply to get the level of the selection of our amplifiers power sections down to a more resonable level unless it is not a high powered beast to begin with and drive/push the power amp some, So it that respect again its been a great buy. If I were going for a more fancy loadbox then I think I'd have to look/buy what Sequis have to offer with thier 'motherload' stuff such as the motherload elemental, Well I have used one a few times and it was good (just never had the cash to drop on one even though they are not overpriced), SPL's take is said to be rather good and I presume alot more than a box of big resistors, Then I also have my eye on Two Notes Audio Engineering Torpedo units which are really good also...Options these days

Hope that helps man and a Koch combo, Nice/pretty hard to go wrong there for a true workhorse/session amp that covers alot of ground and sounds real good with a variety of boost/overdrive and distortions in-front of it. Just quality build and design ain't they

Dean

hi,I bought Nebula mainly for this reason /and for tape simulations,too/ and my opinion-my biggest disappointment with a plugin ever its usable for tube Eq stuff,but nothing more...realistic fast compression like present in tape machines or speakers is totally impossible with Nebula-forget it!/not speaking about huge problems with latency,CPU,GUI etc.etc./

I have Recabinet and seriously cant hear it doing anything good!
I actually thought it wasnt doing anything for the last year lol
But then I have ears of butter and 30 year old hifi speakers haha

Thanks.
What did they possibly do to make Motherload so hihgpriced?

I'be been looking at Weber Mass:
http://www.tedweber.com/atten.htm

They are very reasonable priced - but no cabinet simulation as such. But the load is reactive, not just resistive. I have not tried these though.

About Koch they seem good on paper - but I have miles to go yet to be satisfied. I had to change entry tube to 12AT7 from 12AX7 low noise to get reasonably clean tone with humbuckers on clean channel. Now it's much more useful - going from clean to bluesy to crunch.

I'm picking the cabinet simulated outs as well as outs before filtering and doing speaker emulation in computer to experiment what is better.

But channel with master volume does not behave the way I expected - regulating power tube distortion. It sounds pretty much the same as preamp dist whether I have low gain and push master harder or the other way. And looking in oscilloscope one can see almost square wave directly when trying to drive it harder - like it's clipping inside somewhere.

And tone controls are like on Marshall, almost nothing happends. I like Fender active tone controls better - so much you can do with those.

So that's the reason I'm thinking of getting a reactive load to see how it behaves then. Power tubes and transformer will have more like speaker load then. If this does not turn out better I'm getting rid of it.

I see, thanks.

Cab sections are typically just IRs, so I don't know if that can really be considered modeling in the same sense as the amps and effects, which at least in the case of IK are component-level physical models.

In the case of AmpliTube, we do have a bit more going on behind the scenes with our newest generation of cab/mic modeling that allows for realistic continuous mic placement and even breakthrough rotary speaker simulation. Though even here, IRs are at the heart of all our cabs.

I have only ever tried a Koch Twintone and i enjoyed it but it was abit pricey for me, So the Studiotone I really have no idea how it would compare, Sorry to hear its been dissapointing though FWIW. About the Sequis, Well they to me feel good and sound good, Perhaps they are abit over-priced I won't dispute that at all, Never opened one up to see what is going on inside (I would given half a chance ).

For getting more tonal control on any of my amplifiers I have/use a few things depending on what I'm after, First call is a MarkBass SuperBooster in the amps FX Loop using the VLE (Vintage Loudspeaker Filter)/VPF (Variable Preshape Filter) filters and not the actual boost at all (they can be had for around £100 new, Not looked at them used, If you also play bass guitar it is a handy box to have. I am a big fan) which is usually plenty. However if that is not enough then its time for busting out a Presonus EQ3B half-rack unit parametric EQ (Get one used for much less than £100 I should think) and that sorts out pretty much anything. Purists will/do say that passing the whole signal through a series FX Loop will suck out 'tone' and yada yada, Want true bypass everything but I do not agree, If sounded alot worse then obviously I'd not bother and most importantly if it gets the job done then jobs a good'un

Dean

Edit: Sorry forgot to mention that you might be best off asking about the Weber stuff in the 'your next amp' thread or PM'ing John/Hink directly as I have not used Weber's offerings but I know that Hink does and maybe some of the other guys there. Hope that helps man