Real amps vs modelling and plugin amps

[YnJ]

I've had a number of tube and traditional (non-modeling) solid state amps over the years. But my digital Yamaha THR10 modeling amp sounds better than all of them for low-volume home use

I actually just purchased a second hand a Yamaha DG1000 preamp. I haven't actually tried it yet, it's on the way in the mail. Anyway, I think modelling their own amps instead of actual amps is better as you just accept that this is how it sounds. I recently also got a Boss GL-100 preamp, considered to be an early modelling amp. It's solid state and has settings which are described as generic types of amps. It sounds like it's own thing though, and I really like it. Of course, everything sounds better when you run it through a tube power amp

[Uncle E]

I recently also got a Boss GL-100 preamp, considered to be an early modelling amp. It's solid state and has settings which are described as generic types of amps. It sounds like it's own thing though, and I really like it.

Sounds great! There’s a nice crispness to it:

[tapper mike]

I think we've circulated around to the point of what works for you works for you. And what works for someone else works for someone else

[Naillerz78]

I think we've circulated around to the point of what works for you works for you. And what works for someone else works for someone else

There is a huge lack of uniformity, when it comes to comparing gear, sounds, and instruments.
There is a vast range of results possible in each of those categories. It takes time to learn the digital and analog solutions to what one considers digital or analog 'problems'. But solutions exist. To assume uniformity of listening devices, including the human ears, is another layer. As are the spaces in which things are heard, including the huge range of headphone gear and monitors. Mastering the capabilities of ones tools, however limited or amazing they may be, is more important than opinions about tools one does not own, and can only test within many limitations. And that's all before modern software is introduced in the discussion. Becoming a better player, and maximizing what you have available, is crucial to achieving ones desired results.
Mi dos centavos
Blanket statements

If I were to do a hypothesis based on these 2 statements .. being lack of uniformity and the number of variables etc and basically “ each to their own” .
Then the logical or rational conclusion is
“all gear = good gear. “
Everything is equally “good”.

Like, why do we all bother discussing these things on forums at all (?) if everyone hears everything differently and each to their own. There is no definite conclusion or problem solving on anything if the end caveat is always ; there are too many variables /everyone hears everything differently & each to their own.

It becomes impossible under those conditions to determine if there is a problem with any piece of gear. If any piece of gear is higher or lower quality vs another. And negates the need for discussion or critique. May as well close down the forum.

[BertKoor]

Q: what's the best guitar / amp / mike / pedal / cord / daw / plugin / pc / X for me?
A: how would we know? Go to a real/online shop and demo some things. With some luck there's one whispering in your ear: Take me home

So no, it's not so cuckoo as you think. Asking this question and expecting it helps you, that's truely cuckoo.

[Naillerz78]

Q: what's the best guitar / amp / mike / pedal / cord / daw / plugin / pc / X for me?
A: how would we know? Go to a real/online shop and demo some things. With some luck there's one whispering in your ear: Take me home

So no, it's not so cuckoo as you think. Asking this question and expecting it helps you, that's truely cuckoo.

Mmmm.
Yes but that wasn’t the question of the OP.
His question was “does anyone else find (like me) that any analogue combos are more responsive to playing dynamics than any amp sim plugins /digital modelling combos? “( and therefore kinda sound ‘better’ yes)

I also find this. And trying to figure out why exactly this may be, in some kind of measurable audio terms. So I can be certain it’s not my ears playing tricks.

I did this years ago after trying tons of amp sims and finding them all disappointing and uninspiring. Which led me to forum discussions which led to finding out about Aliasing and digital fizz and white noise present in the sim sounds. So it wasn’t my ears playing tricks, user error, the other gear in the chain, my lack of talent etc etc

There actually was an issue.

That was many years ago during Covid.

My question is - is there still aliasing and fizz present in the sound of high end modellers like Helix and QC in 2025? Cos I’m sure I heard the same harshness testing them last week.

[Uncle E]

With some luck there's one whispering in your ear: Take me home

…I don't want to let you go 'til you see the light…

[Uncle E]

My question is - is there still aliasing and fizz present in the sound of high end modellers like Helix and QC in 2025? Cos I’m sure I heard the same harshness testing them last week.

Tonex and UAFX pedals don’t have it.

[zerocrossing]

My question is - is there still aliasing and fizz present in the sound of high end modellers like Helix and QC in 2025? Cos I’m sure I heard the same harshness testing them last week.

Tonex and UAFX pedals don’t have it.

I've also not noticed aliasing on Tonex, or Amplitube, unless you feed it a signal that's over the range of a guitar, (like C6 or higher) which I guess you might do if you want to feed other instruments into it. Helix Native is a bit better in this regard, but if you're just using guitars, you'll be fine.

Any harshness must be coming from something else. Check your input levels. Not just your audio interface's levels, but the level going into the modeler. For instance, depending on the model, I need to feed Amplitube -7 or -14 db to get good results, but I'm feeding the interface a pretty hot signal. Just a bit less than clipping if I hit a chord really hard.

[glokraw]

I think we've circulated around to the point of what works for you works for you. And what works for someone else works for someone else

There is a huge lack of uniformity, when it comes to comparing gear, sounds, and instruments.
There is a vast range of results possible in each of those categories. It takes time to learn the digital and analog solutions to what one considers digital or analog 'problems'. But solutions exist. To assume uniformity of listening devices, including the human ears, is another layer. As are the spaces in which things are heard, including the huge range of headphone gear and monitors. Mastering the capabilities of ones tools, however limited or amazing they may be, is more important than opinions about tools one does not own, and can only test within many limitations. And that's all before modern software is introduced in the discussion. Becoming a better player, and maximizing what you have available, is crucial to achieving ones desired results.
Mi dos centavos
Blanket statements

If I were to do a hypothesis based on these 2 statements .. being lack of uniformity and the number of variables etc and basically “ each to their own” .
Then the logical or rational conclusion is
“all gear = good gear. “
Everything is equally “good”.

Like, why do we all bother discussing these things on forums at all (?) if everyone hears everything differently and each to their own. There is no definite conclusion or problem solving on anything if the end caveat is always ; there are too many variables /everyone hears everything differently & each to their own.

It becomes impossible under those conditions to determine if there is a problem with any piece of gear. If any piece of gear is higher or lower quality vs another. And negates the need for discussion or critique. May as well close down the forum.

It is indeed possible, when either a vast public consensus, or an inner circle of various trusted experts has access to one's music, and comments accordingly. At the high end, studio engineers and mix/master experts will sort things, while at the low end, one must rely on whatever 'fans' one may have, assuming they will communicate if something is dire, or of high quality. Some 'friends' won't want to hurt a musician's feelings with the truth. (thick skin is a blessing. 'The wounds of a friend are faithful, but the kisses of an enemy are deceitful') What I enjoy doing, is after hearing a song on youtube that I really liked, I'll play one of mine immediately after. If it sounds, or IS bad, in comparison, I'll need to get to work (the Lurssen guys take their pre-releases out to the BMW, to play the work-in-progress CD, where experience has taught it's a good middle ground testbed. )
Cheers

[zerocrossing]

Q: what's the best guitar / amp / mike / pedal / cord / daw / plugin / pc / X for me?
A: how would we know? Go to a real/online shop and demo some things. With some luck there's one whispering in your ear: Take me home

So no, it's not so cuckoo as you think. Asking this question and expecting it helps you, that's truely cuckoo.

True. You can often get in the ballpark advice in terms of features and general tone, but you are correct in that no one can really find the thing that's going to do it for you. I've been burned by marketing, online demos and recommendations. Sometimes all three. But how can you know if the gear of your dreams is not in stock locally? You can find it on line at a place with a good return policy, or buy it used and hope to sell it for about what you paid. The good thing about software is that there's usually a demo version to use. I saw UAD was having a good sale on their guitar amp plugin bundle, so I tried them out. I didn't like them more than what I have, so money saved. For someone else, they're probably fantastic.

It's not always that easy, though. A friend recommended a Strandberger and I was curious but no one around me had any in stock, so I took a risk and bought a used one. It's a great guitar, but it feels like a lateral move in most ways, and I miss my Steinberger's TransTrem bridge, so it rarely gets used. I'll probably put it up for sale in the fall and hope to get near what I paid for it. It's definitely pretty, that's for sure.

[glokraw]

Another thing is, the quality and wide variety of inexpensive (under $1000) hardware means it's easy to miss combinations of products, that could yield the best results. It takes time to research reviews and opinions, and testing in person, a crucial element, costs money to travel to the gear. For some, that could mean an overnight stay at a hotel, to adequately test a range of products, perhaps reducing the budget. The low cost, and ease of resale, also reduces the need for deep testing. It's not very painful to move on after an unrewarding purchase. Or more research could provide an alternate solution at low cost. Also, there are few actual triple-blind comparison tests on youtube, useful to minimize any subtle or profound bias in those testing.
Cheers

[BlackOctopus_Slade]

I actually love doing both. We have a really great guitar room and vintage amps and mics etc, and I’ll dial in a tone and get the”room” and vibe I need for a recording this way but I always bring in a split DI signal for re-amping later both in the box and recorded.
First off you can get great tone on guitar amps just from the mic pres alone. Then your mic selection, spacing, amp room, amp type and settings. But sometimes I may only use a twang tone from the top end of an amp recording and then layer with a sim amp under for the distortion or beef. You can get some amazing tones this way! Plus you can control with fx and switch around pedals easily on the DI sim amp signal.
I say on most projects both is the way to go and decide how much of each. For some truly raw punk rock or vintage sound I may not ever use the sim amp. But 95% of the time I’m using sim amp fx for creative tone and amp as performance.

[Naillerz78]

upgraded to a newer Acer laptop recently . Decided to revisit a few standalone amp sims on it today for some quick practice.

Amplitube 4 - nope. I revisited some discussions n tips online re the input gain needing to be tweaked a lot and lots of messing w Cabs and IRs required. Cbf. Uninstalled.

Guitar Rig 6 - would not run properly. cpu is maxing out on top RHS.I thought my new laptop could run this. Strange.

Kuassa Amplifikation360 - this is was quite fun actually. The preset patches are quite inspiring to mess around with. The Caliburn amp presets have a pretty satisfying crunch to them. And the GUI is cool. I’ll keep playing w this one for now.

Does Kuassa have a floor modeller out btw or just software? I’d like to test if so.

[Uncle E]

Kuassa is just software. Their Amplifikation 360 now loads NAM profiles.