Well, I can't argue that. And what of all the quaint rattles, buzzing and other lovely cabinet vibrations? Very poorly modeled in software, that.seamoss wrote:I don't disagree with anything that you said. In fact, I think you are totally right.kilroy wrote:How about having a go at it yourself?seamoss wrote:Can I hear an MP3 of something in style of SRV or Hendrix? Not too distorted but clean with a glassy tube sound.
Seriously, I think any *real* guitar player could spot subtle differences between the real thing and a simulation, even a very good one. But the question is, do these little differences make the product unusable in the context of musical creativity?
Bad writing kills more tracks than any amp sim *ever* will.
I still think, though, that the amp sims that are currently out are unable to create an authentic tube tone.
Anyroad, here is a fatish blues tone I lashed up for your consideration...minus the real tube gloss you were wanting, but a useable tone never the less. I prefer sounds with good mid range torque.
http://www.headroomproductions.com/Audio/Blues_wet.mp3
and sans the live room...
http://www.headroomproductions.com/Audi ... _dryer.mp3
I work with alot of guitarists, and I always, *always* take a direct line when tracking them. Having the option to re-amp later on is a beautiful thing, and often I simply use software for the ease and convenience. Many times the complementary tones of good amp sims and tasteful programing make big layered guitars sit tighter in a mix than repeated passes with real amps.
But yeah...long live tubes.
