Software has NEVER ACHIEVED Decent Guitar Distortion. Nope.

[guitarzan]

Anyone actually read any of the thread? This thread was actually pretty constructive, despite the title - at least until this morning's peanut gallery showed up.

[guitarzan]

I dunno... it seems to me that the real benefit of the whole amp purist attitude is that you have a real amp and a real room and a real mic. You take that out of the equation and you're back to the same old "emulation isn't as good" argument, but from a different perspective.

Personally, I have no problem whatsoever taking "workarounds" to accomplish a goal... for example, using something like MDA Combo during tracking, and then switching it out for a convolution reverb with an appropriate impulse. Some people argue that you feed off what you hear, and I agree. But only to a certain extent. When tracking vocals, we often track with one reverb and then switch to another later, according to our tastes, or finding the right 'verb to help everything sit in the mix.

I don't know why some guitarists are so precious about their tone. I mean frig, you can sit there and play (and play WELL) without your guitar even plugged in, so don't tell me that if you hear MOST of your tone (very subtle difference in the cab/room sound or whatnot) you can't still rip the same solo? Starts to smack of the mystical or the voodoo. We all have fingers, we all know how to fret, and we all know how to play what we want to play even when we don't have our ideal tone. Why so precious?

Greg

I still think there would be a lot of demand for a great dynamic (convolution or modeled) stand-alone cab/speaker/mic emulator plug anyway. Those who want to quietly record the same equipment they play live gigs on, for instance. And for all those amp sims that just don't have that great of speaker emulation, and that's almost all of them! The nay sayers are permanent, but technology marches on!

"....why, we didn't even NEED fandangled amplimifiers in my day...."

[Empty Uranus]

Hey man, I'm a guitar player, but I'm not really interested in these topics all that much. Every now and then its good to have a bit of a chin wag about tone, but generally I think its a case of subjectivity.

After listening to a little of your page, I never heard a guitar, only those little ambience thingies. Hence - your outlook on guitarists.

I actually play guitar, bass, some drums, a little keyboard, sing, and can normally get something out of anything that might make a note of music. My best musical achievement? Pulling off a killer version of Smoke on the Water with a 1985 Johnson 30 HP boatmotor while drunk. If I would have had that on tape, I'd be well rich now.

Seriously - if you don't worry about guitar tone, chances are that you apply the same attitude towards most everything else in the application towards good sounding music. Half-assed is as Half-assed does....

[Jason Brian Merrill]

Because its a time tested tradition that guitarists are wankers, that's why.

Yeah, and on that ground womens are mandolin experts

music smooth the world, no doubt ( especially plucked string instruments as we can notice )


Make mewzik not whore

+1 for the post that made the most sense

[Synesthesiac]

I still think there would be a lot of demand for a great dynamic (convolution or modeled) stand-alone cab/speaker/mic emulator plug anyway. Those who want to quietly record the same equipment they play live gigs on, for instance. And for all those amp sims that just don't have that great of speaker emulation, and that's almost all of them! The nay sayers are permanent, but technology marches on!

"....why, we didn't even NEED fandangled amplimifiers in my day...."

great points,there could be a market there guitarzan.

just like in those established studio houses where folks are enjoying integration of the sound of analog 24 track decks with the joys of computer digital editing.

[Lunch Money]

I still think there would be a lot of demand for a great dynamic (convolution or modeled) stand-alone cab/speaker/mic emulator plug anyway. Those who want to quietly record the same equipment they play live gigs on, for instance. And for all those amp sims that just don't have that great of speaker emulation, and that's almost all of them!

I'm simply saying that you CAN already do it... the actual recording process might not have the same realtime sound as the final product (due to using algorithmic cab emulator), but in the end you can still use one of the many fixed-latency convolutions rather than a dynamic one. The "why so precious?" was just wondering, "are people seriously saying they can't track with a current cab emulator and then switch to convolution after??" I think tone is really important, but I think that ultimately all of us are able to do just fine with that technique.

The nay sayers are permanent, but technology marches on!

Hope you didn't mean me. Questioning the marketability of an idea certainly doesn't mean that I'm arbitrarily or summarily dismissing it. It's kind of "easy" to just imply that someone not entirely impressed by an idea is some sort of stodgy or backward-looking person. Jeez, I know you read the thread because you were questioning other peoples' effort levels in such-- surely you saw that I'm promoting forward thinking, not going against it.

"....why, we didn't even NEED fandangled amplimifiers in my day...."

Well, I don't think that any of us "need" an amplifier to play well. You don't ever just sit on your couch with an unplugged electric and play anyhow, playing even things that with your "mind's ear" should require distortion? Of course you do. Doesn't mean that an amplifier (or, as this thread discusses, amp sim) isn't eventually part of the equation. My contention is that if you can do THAT, certainly the differences between a current-generation cab emulator and a convolution-based one aren't going to make or break the way you approach a song.

Greg

[Synesthesiac]

hi, ima wanker, hear me wank:

i'm also a guitar player, i play the guitar, i make it make the noise. when playing an amplified guitar,if i hear a note swelling or screaming, or in any cool way emoting it's will to express it's hertzing soul , or two or more chordal notes interacting in a harmonic tug of sweet sonic war, i will defer to their outpouring of expressive gifts and dwell blissfully in their emergent qualities , those moments are precious and i will ultimately choose those takes even if they contain errors.

all and any combinations of different cabs/impulses, amps, pickups, wood, wire, picks, fingers can contribute to these moments but one constant remains: the feeding off what you hear. if you can hear it you can work it.

if you want to be soulless be aware that the sequencer, and to a lesser extent sample player, has already replaced you.

[Lunch Money]

Why so precious?

You will get the same screaming... swelling... and the "harmonic tug of sweet sonic war" regardless of whether your cab is emulated with an algorithm or a convolution-- the core tone is the same.

Wait, let's see if I can do it, too:

I'm a guitarist, but I'm an acolyte of attack and a disciple of decay. I throw myself at the feet of that screaming, that wailing, that heart-wrenching evocation that IS the wild moment of abandon when you're not thinking, man, but PLAYING. I offer myself up and it don't matter if my fingers are doing something "technical," because when I'm lost in the moment it's all the right thing anyhow! And when that string that you squeeze every last drop out of gives it right back to you, rewarding you with tones or notes, or beautiful beautiful DISCORD that make your scalp tingle and your feet itch, THAT'S when you know you're a guitarist and not just some wannabe who's never prayed at the altar and is too busy picking apart some stupid argument about software to ever feel that electricity, man! The guitar, for all its flaws becomes a part of you that you CONNECT with; and your playing, for all its flaws, becomes an audible expression of who you are.

It's all about your soul, and anyone who thinks otherwise needs to rethink what's important in their pursuit of their instrument.


Or something.



Greg

[Synesthesiac]

i dunno, this kind of dancing about architecture is a difficult thing. although my language was meant to amuse and was fleetingly flowery and not unlike hyperbole i believe the core tone will not be the same. pickups, algorythms,impulses, meatspace circuits, wire, wood, etc. all have their individual resonances, if you can predict those harmonic interactions then you do believe in the mystical

if you want to treat the guitar sound like a mix, sculpt it after recording, fine, i wanna create the sound then and there which demands that all the elements are there, so kill me. i also partake of the 'creating it in the mix'thing and have been soul satisfied.

but why can't we seek the precious? it ain't a fixation on power,smeagal, but a search for beauty. you know, art.

[Empty Uranus]

In the end - it's whatever suits whom.....

I will say this. Do you think Hendrix would have gotten half of his feedback sounds out of a PC?

[BRIGGS]

In the end - it's whatever suits whom.....

I will say this. Do you think Hendrix would have gotten half of his feedback sounds out of a PC?

interesting...

[Hink]

In the end - it's whatever suits whom.....

I will say this. Do you think Hendrix would have gotten half of his feedback sounds out of a PC?

no but there's a good chance he would of had a tuner

[guitarzan]

I still think there would be a lot of demand for a great dynamic (convolution or modeled) stand-alone cab/speaker/mic emulator plug anyway. Those who want to quietly record the same equipment they play live gigs on, for instance. And for all those amp sims that just don't have that great of speaker emulation, and that's almost all of them!

I'm simply saying that you CAN already do it... the actual recording process might not have the same realtime sound as the final product (due to using algorithmic cab emulator), but in the end you can still use one of the many fixed-latency convolutions rather than a dynamic one. The "why so precious?" was just wondering, "are people seriously saying they can't track with a current cab emulator and then switch to convolution after??" I think tone is really important, but I think that ultimately all of us are able to do just fine with that technique.

The nay sayers are permanent, but technology marches on!

Hope you didn't mean me. Questioning the marketability of an idea certainly doesn't mean that I'm arbitrarily or summarily dismissing it. It's kind of "easy" to just imply that someone not entirely impressed by an idea is some sort of stodgy or backward-looking person. Jeez, I know you read the thread because you were questioning other peoples' effort levels in such-- surely you saw that I'm promoting forward thinking, not going against it.

"....why, we didn't even NEED fandangled amplimifiers in my day...."

Well, I don't think that any of us "need" an amplifier to play well. You don't ever just sit on your couch with an unplugged electric and play anyhow, playing even things that with your "mind's ear" should require distortion? Of course you do. Doesn't mean that an amplifier (or, as this thread discusses, amp sim) isn't eventually part of the equation. My contention is that if you can do THAT, certainly the differences between a current-generation cab emulator and a convolution-based one aren't going to make or break the way you approach a song.

Greg

I was mostly agreeing with you, Lunch Money. I was going on to say that even though there would always be some who would never be happy with anything but their amp and mic that there still would be a great demand for a top-notch speaker/cab/mic sim. And my reason for being so insistant on the point is, for one, I think it's true, and also - I 'm trying to plant or reinforce a good idea in some passing software developer's head. That's it. The greatest thing about the KVR forum is that the people are here that can actually make a lot of the stuff that we discuss happen, at least in the software or hybrid software/hardware areas.

[guitarzan]

In the end - it's whatever suits whom.....

I will say this. Do you think Hendrix would have gotten half of his feedback sounds out of a PC?

If you turn up your monitors a little bit and get real close, you have a screaming guitar amp! Really - works pretty much the same, feedback wise.

Or crank it up and yank off the knobs and stand back, but that kinda defeats the purpose, for me!

[Lunch Money]

pickups, algorythms,impulses, meatspace circuits, wire, wood, etc. all have their individual resonances, if you can predict those harmonic interactions then you do believe in the mystical

But that's not mutually exclusive. I can tackle a problem (ie. trying to record an amp sound) from various angles without that diminishing my respect for the guitar. And I also know when to cut to the heart of the matter. I think that mahogany + maple sounds better than plywood. I think that a Duncan JB pickup sounds better than a generic Cort pickup. I've designed and have begun construction of an entire guitar based on several different tone factors, and selected White Limba (aka Korina) and chambered it, because I believe that the tone of Korina rules. But all of that is irrelevant to the point at hand.

if you want to treat the guitar sound like a mix, sculpt it after recording, fine, i wanna create the sound then and there which demands that all the elements are there, so kill me. i also partake of the 'creating it in the mix'thing and have been soul satisfied.

Right, but again-- it's not about that. It's about finding a solution to a problem, and I think (and I repeat again) that we already have the solution without having to make a wishlist for it! I don't treat the guitar sound like a mix, I treat the guitar (the instrument) like a guitar and just play the f**ker. I don't understand why people get so hung up on little things when you can get just as much joy and inspiration without being so sentimental and/or voodoo-like about it. How many times do you hear people say, "give so-and-so-famous-guitarist a Samick and a Bandit and they'll still sound like themselves." And in my opinion, a guitarist worth his salt CAN and WILL play well and with inspiration no matter what gear...

And that being the case, and getting back to the the REAL point (again... it seems to get forgotten), a mere tiny piddly thing like algorithmic vs. convolution cab emulation is during realtime tracking is nothing.

Again, though, I don't dismiss the idea of dynamic convolution, I just think that we already have suitable solutions. And I don't know that a standalone would really be a big seller. I think that people still expect it to be a part of an overall amp sim. Very few people are going to buy a "cab + mic," they want the amp. Most people are willing to settle for a good amp and then add the "cab + mic" with static convolution later.

but why can't we seek the precious? it ain't a fixation on power,smeagal, but a search for beauty. you know, art.

It's not about seeking the precious, it's about BEING precious. The precious should be in how you feel when you're playing. It's really annoying when people twist your words around to make it seem like you're saying the opposite of what you are. The fact that I like to cut through bullshit and come up with real solutions doesn't automatically mean by contrast that I don't believe in care and attention, or that I don't think good tone is worth pursuing.

By the same extension, I'll take the opportunity to once again state that I see nothing wrong with the idea of dynamic convolution and "a better cab + mic" sim, I just don't know that there'd be a huge market for it as a standalone. People who don't trust in sim amps are primarily concerned with the authenticity of the tone stack and gain stage, and secondarily with the cab. Nobody is going to take a "cheesy" sim and expect it to be good by having an unbeatable cab sim. It all starts with the amp, which is why I think (strictly in terms of marketing, not in terms of whether it'd be a useful tool or not) that it still has to be part of an amp sim package, not a standalone.

--

Regarding Hendrix and feedback: Guitarzan has it exactly right. There's nothing magical about feedback, it's waves interacting with your strings. You can do that with any loud source, and if you have decent enough monitors, or even the humblest 5W amp, you have more than enough volume to feed back.

It's funny you should mention Hendrix. If there was ever a guitarist who cared LESS about being precious with tone, it was Hendrix. Sure, we love the way his guitar sounded, and he had a few parts of his setup that he grew to love (ie. Marshall amps), but he was never really all that concerned with gear. I mean, at the time, a Strat wasn't exactly considered a "great" guitar for tone. If you listen to the engineering and production of those discs, it wasn't universally great. His raw tone, I'll go out on a limb and say, SUCKED in some of his songs. But he still ruled because he played great anyhow.

Do you think Hendrix would plug into an amp sim and say, "Man, I can't play with this shit." Hell no. He'd be wide-eyed like a kid, playing with all the possibilities. Stacking and chaining multiple amps together, and he'd likely be thrilled to be able to do it without having 10 amps cranked up to 10. He'd be stoked about the possibilities of technology, and would abuse them. He loved all that crap... backwards solos being a good example. He wouldn't be all hung up on this crap and would just be playing.

Feedback, it's not magical or impossible. It's physics and it's easy to produce.

Greg