KVR Audio

Amberience · Post by **Amberience** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:26 am

Squids wrote:Ok, I am back! My head is ready to explode from airplane compression (not a good effect ).

I like the response from GuitarJeff. Very reasonable and understandable. Puts a little more behind where he's coming from for me. Sorry if I sounded harsh, it wasn't intended that way but I also had no sleep and went to a funeral in freezing weather.

The tone challenge thing is fun (will have to be in another thread to be followed- this one you couldn't find anything!) and yes that IS a good point about the REST of the "tone" coming from you, your guitar etc. But, at least certain stomp/amp settings that get close to a sound... it'll still be fun I am sure!

Yes, Beardedone, I want that Synclav sound too. I have to see if I have it or if I can find a way to sample it.

As for AmpliTube 2 and "the hype", please understand that I don't want anyone to just take my word for it especially if they think that my loving/appreciating it means it will sound exactly like your favorite hardware amp!!! To some people it will and to others it won't. I can say that for me I would use it on a professional recording and I would not have used too many other amp sims before (well, maybe, it depends on the sound and if it is working or not in context... I don't care if it is a cheap pedal or a deluxe vintage amp rig- if it sounds right then good for me!).

I think there are people who just don't like amp sims. Even if they get closer with things like DSM or component modeling, mic modeling etc. there could still be other aspects of hardware that they'd miss. That is understandable. It is always a trade-off. If anybody undestands trade-offs it is someone who works with samples!!! For example, I LOVE a great sample of a violin or string section. However, I love a real acoustic violin or string section played live much more. But, the sampled version is useful and convenient (and I will end up using it more). So, from that POV, something like AmpliTube (or any amp sim) may not be as great as having all the stomps in a Bradshaw rig running into a Fender, Vox, Marshall, THD, Mesa etc. in hardware. But, it is less expensive, faster to use and try out combinations of the amp components (without ruining vintage gear as well), it is convenient, flexible for the mixing stages, writing stages, tracking reference, it allows you to store the sounds for recall later, it is fully controllable (hey, if I could hook up a pedal to control every parameter on my real stomps I'd be pretty happy!!!!) and many other things that you get for around three hundy.

So, it is a matter of perspective. To me it is a no-brainer "must-have" piece (as is Ampeg SVX). It certainly seems that way by the response from pro musicians I have seen. At Frankfurt John McGlaughlin came right up to us to tell us how much he loved it. You see enough of that type of thing and you get extra reassurance about a product (even if you knew you liked it yourself). But, I can see that it is not necessarily a "no-brainer" for everyone. Some want to be absolutely sure they love it and I totally agree. You should know for yourself and feel comfortable about it or at least comfortable about what you will get for the money. It may NOT get you the exact sound of this guitar player or that, this hardware amp or that... but will it be useful in your music creation? Enough to warrant the investment? Only you can answer that.

Side note here, I just heard an interesting story. There is an artist who won a Latin Grammy that played here last night named Juanes. They apparently said that they used AmpliTube 1 on the record (the one that won the grammy) and this is how it happened. They were tracking the guitar with the intention of re-amping it later. So, they used AmpliTube for reference. Then when they re-amped it later they actually liked the way it sounded with AmpliTube better so they just kept it. Hey, whatever works. It is good to just have the tools. Even if it WAS only use for reference it would be still worth having. But, for the fact that it ended up being the better sound for the track (which CAN happen, even if the amp "technically" is more "like an amp") then it is that much more worth having I think.

Good sound is subjective but if it "works" in your music then to me that is really the MAIN thing that matters. Does it fit within the context of the song??? Because that is what the listener is hearing and not your hardware amp solo for all the nuances.

My thoughts for the day.

I'm so high now squids, smoked too much and think I'm Ghandi or or something. But I really enjoyed your post. Because it sounded like salesman talk to me. But of course, I already had this image of your being the salesman, so I guess it's not surprising that I thought that originally.

What I will say though. Your comments are very entertaining. I really enjoyed reading this post you've made, because as I said, I have taken in a lot of cannabis, and thus feel like a complete and utter communication God. I mean, I am positive right now that what I am saying to you, that you will understand it fully, hundred percent as it were. I have no doubts that you will be fully understanding what I am saying. I know it. I know that you're getting me.

This entire post is a stream of conscious poetry. Even now I just had to look up "conscious" on dictionary.com to see if I had spelt it right or not. And this fact makes my post much more entertaining because of that. The fact that I took in some inherbriats and then tried to communicate, and had to make sure I was doing it right on all levels, that fact is really enjoyable for me.

And it is a fact that I am communicating fully. I will be communicating SOMETHING of consistence, even though our ideas on what I'm communicating might be different.

This is the fatal flaw in language, and probably why not every single human gets along with everyone else.

Thanks for the opportunity to express myself.

A3ntar · Post by **A3ntar** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:40 am

Oh well, at least he aknowldeges that he is high

Beardedone · Post by **Beardedone** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:58 am

Thanks Hink for sharing your well reasoned thoughts and good sense.

Cheers,
Gordon

A3ntar · Post by **A3ntar** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 12:59 am

Really I truly believe that if you have to ask someone else to get that tone for you, you aren't ready for it yet. You need to learn how to walk before you can run.

Hink, with all due respect, I disagree with your statments. It is like saying, before your drive a car, you have to know how it is build.

True some people will always want to know how the car is constructed, what components were involved in the construction phase, gear rations, parts interactions, while others don't give a damn as long as the car drives and handles well.

Does that make you a better or worst driver? Not necessarly. Somebody well versed on the matter of car mechanics can still drive like a drunk monkey, while another person that coudn't differentiate a piston from a axcel could well be a very good driver indeed.

So all your knowledge and experience on the car's under layers made you not a good driver, but a very good mechanic. Of course you could well be both a good mechanic and a great driver so as if something breaks or you want to tweak the performance, you know how to do it by yoursef, while the good non machanical savvy driver has to rely on someone else, and it is fine with him.

If we transpose that to the guitar/tone world, the driver is the guitar player, and the mechanical side of it is the tone maker. You might well be the best tone maker in the world but barley know how to strike a C chord, and the opposite is of course equally true.

I think we must stop blaming people that choose simplicity and conveniance over complexity and "you got to know it all" mentality, and decide to focus on the task on hand instead. Do I really care if my injector is spraying 0.03u of gaz in the combustion chambre? No! I just want to get home!

fritzman · Post by **fritzman** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:15 am

What I understood is that Hink talked about the differentiation between the obvious tone parts (guitar, strings, tuning, pick, amp, cab, mic, FX,etc.) and the way how to use all these things PLUS the playing/performance of the artist. As pointed out the same setup with two guitarists playing even the same notes can sound extrememely different. I had that several times when recording.
Even with one amp: First time I experienced that to an extreme was when I was at a concert called "night of guitars". A big show with 2 dozen top guitarists.
They had a Marshall stack on stage and several people played it, a few sounded ok and some sounded s***. And then this guy called Leslie West came on stage and used this amp. He tweaked the amps settings and he had a GREAT!!!!!!! sound! Man, that was an extreme experience.

Best wishes, FRitz

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:17 am

Hink, with all due respect, I disagree with your statments. It is like saying, before your drive a car, you have to know how it is build.

no it's not even close...it's more like saying you should know how to drive a stick as well as an automatic...you make it sound like I'm saying someone should know how to make an amp...I didn't say that, but you should know what each control on your amp is, what it does and how to use it towards your advantage...Just like you should know what every user feature of a car does...I'm not talking about taking an amp apart, just using some simple dials and knobs...if you can't see that I really feel sorry for you...it's not engineering, it's not rocket science...the tones people are talking about here and in Rene's thread are like learning to count to ten...it's basics and a guitar player should imo understand the basics...but if you don't agree that's cool...but it's nothing like you desribe imo...

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:19 am

fritzman wrote:What I understood is that Hink talked about the differentiation between the obvious tone parts (guitar, strings, tuning, pick, amp, cab, mic, FX,etc.) and the way how to use all these things PLUS the playing/performance of the artist. As pointed out the same setup with two guitarists playing even the same notes can sound extrememely different. I had that several times when recording.
Even with one amp: First time I experienced that to an extreme was when I was at a concert called "night of guitars". A big show with 2 dozen top guitarists.
They had a Marshall stack on stage and several people played it, a few sounded ok and some sounded s***. And then this guy called Leslie West came on stage and used this amp. He tweaked the amps settings and he had a GREAT!!!!!!! sound! Man, that was an extreme experience.

Best wishes, FRitz

I saw him in 82, the guy was half the size of a house...he had lean against a stool...and damn did he rock..

A3ntar · Post by **A3ntar** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:24 am

it's basics and a guitar player should imo understand the basics...but if you don't agree that's cool...but it's nothing like you desribe imo...

Honestly Hink, that is the way I see it. Do you need to be a "tone expert" in order to be a good guitar player? I think not. I mean you could all your life play with a tone setup somebody have created for you, and you would still be a good guitarist. Maybe a boring one, but still a good one

Referring back to my post, some people don't care how their tone was constructed ( hence the car refference ), they just want to plug their guitars and play. If you give them presets it is even better. It is like now having a choice of the color of the car to ride and some higher level performance ratios.

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:37 am

A3ntar wrote:
it's basics and a guitar player should imo understand the basics...but if you don't agree that's cool...but it's nothing like you desribe imo...
Honestly Hink, that is the way I see it. Do you need to be a "tone expert" in order to be a good guitar player? I think not. I mean you could all your life play with a tone setup somebody have created for you, and you would still be a good guitarist. Maybe a boring one, but still a good one

Referring back to my post, some people don't care how their tone was constructed ( hence the car refference ), they just want to plug their guitars and play. If you give them presets it is even better. It is like now having a choice of the color of the car to ride and some higher level performance ratios.

me the day I stop learning is the day I close my eyes for good, and even then I still learn...I learn what is or isn't on the other side...I'm really sorry you dont see that...technique and understanding go hand in hand...actually your two posts saddens me deeply, whatever happened to passion and drive, what happened to the thrill of learning?...

Guitarjeff · Post by **Guitarjeff** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:40 am

Well, I do know how to get a good sound from My Marshalls and now My new(used)SLO.

My point is that I can't seem to get a good usable rhythm guitar sound from amp sims. I HAVE used them for leads on various things but so far for rhythm tracks they still sound thin and harsh to me. I'd LIKE to use them for convenience sake. Yes, I have an X-amp and can reamp all I want with the amps I have available to me. It IS a hassle though, compared to what having a truly good sounding amp sim would mean. I have a POD too, and that still seems more usable than any of the virtual amp sims on the market at the present time.

I've sat down with one of my Les Pauls a few times and tweaked the hell out of GR-2 recently. I even think I have a good tone after a while, but then when I try to use it in a mix, I realize it's not very good.

The reason I bring up the Sykes tone, is that for me that's pretty much a holy grail of RG sound. The only amp I've played through that has something close to that sound is my buddy's (Rob in Outland) Jose Arredondo Marshall. That's a pretty magic sounding amp and he won't sell it to me.

I am sampling it this weekend for Rene's Amp sim project, so we'll see how that goes.

Jeff

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:48 am

Jeff you just made my point, thank you...and I too like the Sykes sound, amounst others...but you know how to get it, you just haven't found the sim that responds the way you need it to...that was my point...

A3ntar · Post by **A3ntar** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 1:56 am

whatever happened to passion and drive, what happened to the thrill of learning?...

Not everyone passions gravitate around the same interrests, Hink. There is many sub topics around the electric guitar alone for you to pick as a given subject. People might like the finger movement part of it, nailing the techniques and exelling at them. Some might like the mechanics of the guitar, how the string vibrate and produce sound. Some preffer to be well versed on the electrics of it. Others like how the sound is actually processed once it exits the guitar, and couldn't care much of the steps precursors to that. I mean, why would one be any worst than the other? Your passions is not everybody else's passions. You should not feel bad or saddned, you should accept and embrace the difference

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:00 am

okay this not a final guitar take, it's just one part, unmixed, no dp, no noise reduction...it's part of my writing process...I write a quicky guitar track that I think will be close to what I want so I can tweak the tones around it...this is that stage and part of an instrumental, I whipped this out today...ignore the flaws in playing...besides distortion and a tiny amount of reverb, what other effects do I use?

clip

Hink · Post by **Hink** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 2:01 am

on the guitar that is

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Sat Jan 28, 2006 3:25 am

Clip's too short, but I coulda sworn I heard a tad of phaser in there. Great sound, though!

Regarding presets-- I'm in the middle of a wee demo tutorial for the folks at Channel 6 who use the TonePort. Not to demonstrate tones (in fact, I'm just whipping up tones, not focusing on them) but just to demonstrate throwing a track together using a particular sequencer.

I tried my best to use presets so that they'd have a point of reference, but at the end of the day, only one preset survived unaltered.

I'm not that meticulous, or articulate, but I can hear instantly, "Man, I need more mid" and then I just quickly throw'er up to "8" or whatever... I don't sit there and tweak to see if "7.75" is better, I just throw it into the ballpark.

Even more telling than that, though-- I've heard the "jumping off point" argument lots, and I used to agree. But I'm starting to disagree these days. I could pick a "Nashville" preset because I want a twangy telecaster sound, and then all the sudden I just go, "Man, this Tweed sim isn't cutting it..." and switch to the AC30. Then, "This cab is all wrong" and cycle through a few cabs to find one that sounds right. Then, "Now the tone stack needs to be addressed."

By that point in time, I'd have been better off just building from the ground up. Sure, I might have still tried the Tweed to begin with (a tele... a "tweed"... a good starting point!) but just as an amp selection, not as a preset. Ya know?

One exception I've found with the TonePort is the "Bring Me To Life" preset, which I think sounds great for certain kinds of music. I rarely need to touch that one. I've heard other fans of the unit with other presets they gravitate to. I almost always feel inspired by Green Machine Amp II's "Paula's Favourite" preset with no additional tweaking.

Come to think of it, I guess that makes my entire argument kind of schizophrenic... on one hand, I think you should build a tone from the ground up. But on the other hand, I've stumbled across some presets that work well.

I'll just get me coat...

Greg

Amplitube 2 Jimi Hendrix RELEASED this month!!!