Real amps vs modelling and plugin amps

[Naillerz78]

Looks like Tim Pierce gives the Tonex a big thumbs up
I should expect he will profile and then sell his arsenal of awesome tube amps in the near future to make lotsa $$$ and save all that space.

OK, have to hand it to you on that point, it's been 2 years and he's still using amps.

Tonex solves a problem that he doesn’t have. It also introduces new problems. On some amps, tone stacks and EQs are often interacting with gain controls in both subtle and drastic ways. This isn’t captured by Tonex, or any other technology. I’m not sure if it could, considering how many possible settings are available on a simple gain-bass-mid-treble-presence-volume amp. This is where modeling shines, because one can mathematically model an amp on a circuit level. Maybe it’s accurate, maybe not, but it’s a better approximation than the simple EQ controls of Tonex and other capture devices. I could see keeping amps so that new sounds can be made, and then using the Tonex to capture those tones for live use, or whatever.

Hmmm. I think what is claimed about it certainly solves a problem he surely has. That he has $100,000+ (guesstimate) worth of money tied up in guitar amplifiers and cabinets in his studio and iso-basement. If Tonex accurately replicates amplifiers to a T he’d quickly profile them all and liquidate the assets to turn to something else. Imagine the benefits. It’s a no-brainer. You wouldnt keep THAT much gear around if there’s an all in one solution that’s identical.

But he won’t, cos it isn’t.
It’s telling to me he did such a sparse demo of it (4-5 tones) that’s always suspect.

If he didn’t get paid for the review ,he’ll get a freebie unit,
Or else just reviewing to jump on trend at the time.

I don’t believe it. Does not compute.

Your defence is a massive stretch of logic. and money is money.

Tim Pierce doesnt use it, Rhet Shull doesn’t use it,Rick beato hasn’t converted and Liquidated he’s got even more $$$ tied up. all these guitar session guys don’t use them. It would solve SO many problems for them. So obviously gear hounds and pro guitarists can tell the difference.

Because it’s clear to me they are not good enough. yet.

[Uncle E]

Hmmm. I think what is claimed about it certainly solves a problem he surely has. That he has $100,000+ (guesstimate) worth of money tied up in guitar amplifiers and cabinets in his studio and iso-basement. If Tonex accurately replicates amplifiers to a T he’d quickly profile them all and liquidate the assets to turn to something else. Imagine the benefits. It’s a no-brainer. You wouldnt keep THAT much gear around if there’s an all in one solution that’s identical.

Tim Pierce is a session guy and needs to be able to quickly turn knobs to get the sound right. Tonex can't do that, at least not authentically.

[Naillerz78]

Hmmm. I think what is claimed about it certainly solves a problem he surely has. That he has $100,000+ (guesstimate) worth of money tied up in guitar amplifiers and cabinets in his studio and iso-basement. If Tonex accurately replicates amplifiers to a T he’d quickly profile them all and liquidate the assets to turn to something else. Imagine the benefits. It’s a no-brainer. You wouldnt keep THAT much gear around if there’s an all in one solution that’s identical.

Tim Pierce is a session guy and needs to be able to quickly turn knobs to get the sound right. Tonex can't do that, at least not authentically.

Well… exactly!
Not sure which camp you are in E!
He has 25,000 profiles to get the sound right apparently, shouldn’t be a problem afaics with the endless options. Ought to be a dream and a mega problem solver for those guys .. as they can really play.

[Uncle E]

Well… exactly!
Not sure which camp you are in E!
He has 25,000 profiles to get the sound right apparently, shouldn’t be a problem afaics with the endless options. Ought to be a dream and a mega problem solver for those guys .. as they can really play.

We're kind of all saying the same thing now. If money, space, and volume weren't an issue, we'd all be using real amps, and those things aren't issues for him.

[zerocrossing]

Well… exactly!
Not sure which camp you are in E!
He has 25,000 profiles to get the sound right apparently, shouldn’t be a problem afaics with the endless options. Ought to be a dream and a mega problem solver for those guys .. as they can really play.

We're kind of all saying the same thing now. If money, space, and volume weren't an issue, we'd all be using real amps, and those things aren't issues for him.

I’d add that for some music, amps are not a good tool, regardless of the money you throw at it. Doing the type of live-looping guitar work that I do is really impossible to do with traditional guitar amps.

[Naillerz78]

Well… exactly!
Not sure which camp you are in E!
He has 25,000 profiles to get the sound right apparently, shouldn’t be a problem afaics with the endless options. Ought to be a dream and a mega problem solver for those guys .. as they can really play.

We're kind of all saying the same thing now. If money, space, and volume weren't an issue, we'd all be using real amps, and those things aren't issues for him.

Well that’s good we are all agreeing now they aren’t there yet
Re money space and volume .We can buy cheap ,small and scaleable watt tube amps tho . That Tonex is $800 AUD here ! I can get a 2nd hand AC10 or AC15 for that money!

If I HAD to get a modeller fx unit for some reason, I’d get a 2nd hand NUX MG300 for about $150 AUD. It’s a bit harsh, but has character in this Leon Todd video. sounds on par with the others to me , in that the 2D sounds would get old in a few weeks same as others. I could sell it for what I paid later tho. Looks easy to use , simple and clean GUI. That Vox sounds alright and the Rush Limelight tone too.



I always compare the Vox tones on these digital solutions. Cos that’s the one hardest to simulate with all the highs in it. They all sound either cut off /muffled or really harsh in the high end. It’s most noticeable with the Vox models. Tonex Vox sounds chopped off to my ears.
I can’t find a demo video of it with proper jingle jangle sounds on YT. But anyway.

Pedals like the UAD Ruby etc sell for as much as an actual Vox amp also so don’t appeal.


So anyway looks like we’ve all come around to the OPs POV. Haha

[YnJ]

And here I am, having played around with a modelling preamp for the last couple of days

Nah, I still stand by my point of view, no digital modelling amp or plugin can replace a tube or solid state amp. I never said there's no room for using modelling amps or plugins for certain things though, they are certainly more practical if you are playing a lot live and don't have a road crew, I would probably use a modelling amp myself if I did gigs with a cover band. I would use a real amp when playing with my own band live though

I found that, using the Teleporter pedal UncleE recommended to me loading plugin amps in the effects loop on my Boss GX-700, they sounded much better than when I tried routing them directly to the power amp, especially with distorted sounds using the built in analogue drives. Even without the drives, this unit from 1996 did a better impression of a Marshall than the Marshall Code amps, using essentially the same software. There's probably good reasons for that which I don't have the know how to explain

I don't know why more modelling amps don't use solid state components and tubes combined with the digital models, they make so much difference to the sound quality. Even when the models suck, as the included models in the GX-700, the analogue drives make the unit sound as good or better as any digital modelling amp I personally have encountered, and I'm sure having a power amp with tubes helps as well

I got the GX-700 with the intention of ignoring the amp models and use it as a multieffect unit only. With newer and better amp models, at least in the sense that they sound better, I can actually find use for it as a preamp. It still don't have much dynamic response, and still sound kind of cheesy, in a good way though

[glokraw]

Whatever is being used, expertise takes time to acquire. In Tim's case, decades, and having 'learned how to learn', and having deep recall of effects and controls and settings that work well together, I can guarantee that if he spent a couple of months mastering tonex, or some competing gear, that the results would be amazing.

The point and purpose of these great new devices, is to bring the essence of decades into focus and availability, at a price that people can afford. We don't need studios and iso booths and consoles, and don't need a dedicated 'music room' so even the real estate savings, if one chose to achieve them, would pay for a lot of gear in short order.

In my case, having Axiom 2, Guitar Rig 6, Komplete 13 effects, Mixbox, MAX versions of Amplitube 4, 5, T-racks and ToneX, each of these could soak up every spare hour for months on end, years and years of things to experiment with and learn about. (my wife says 'don't shop for groceries until after dinner'

Our answers to important questions will differ
1. How many songs do I hope to compose in a year?
2. How many free performances will I provide?
3. How many paid gigs will I profit from?
4. Will I become a teacher, and charge for lessons?
5. Will I seek attention on the interwebs streaming sites and forums?
6. Will I advertise and sell things on the interwebs?
7. How many hours a day will I invest in creativity?
8. Will I prioritize my budget, with music tools coming before more tangible expenditures?
9. Is there a compelling reason for someone to hear my music more than once? (yikes )
Mi dos centavos

[Uncle E]

Re money space and volume .We can buy cheap ,small and scaleable watt tube amps tho . That Tonex is $800 AUD here ! I can get a 2nd hand AC10 or AC15 for that money!

Yes, you're right. It's just down to the problem each person is trying to solve. Personally, the AC10 and AC15 don't solve my main issue, plus I don't like the way they sound, but I can fully understand why they're great options for many other people.

[Uncle E]

I don't know why more modelling amps don't use solid state components and tubes combined with the digital models, they make so much difference to the sound quality.

Line 6 made the Spider Valve, with a tube section designed by Reinhold Bogner. I tried it and hated it, but that was probably the old amp modeling tech holding it back. If they made it again using the Helix modeling, I imagine it would sound a lot better.

All other digital amps are made with solid state components. When I was using my Tonex pedal with the Line 6 AmpliFi, it purely went through the solid state power section, with no digital processing involved. It was good (particularly for stereo effects!) but I personally prefer plugging in to my tube power amp.

[Naillerz78]

I found that, using the Teleporter pedal UncleE recommended to me loading plugin amps in the effects loop on my Boss GX-700, they sounded much better than when I tried routing them directly to the power amp, especially with distorted sounds using the built in analogue drives. Even without the drives, this unit from 1996 did a better impression of a Marshall than the Marshall Code amps, using essentially the same software. There's probably good reasons for that which I don't have the know how to explain

The Code was really bad. Not sure how Marshall messed up so much on that one. Prob related to my answer to the below tho.

I don't know why more modelling amps don't use solid state components and tubes combined with the digital models, they make so much difference to the sound quality. Even when the models suck, as the included models in the GX-700, the analogue drives make the unit sound as good or better as any digital modelling amp I personally have encountered, and I'm sure having a power amp with tubes helps as well

The answer is to drive down costs to a fraction of real components and increase profit margins to a very sizeable degree.

I always look at digital that way now when considering to buy .What’s actually in the box? It’s a pcb board, some chips , attached to in a metal case with some sockets. Is it worth the asking price? Usually not.

I watched a video once back in the day of a guy dismantling and inspecting a Vox Valvetronix modelling amp. It was the cheapest of the cheap components top to bottom. Maybe cost $100 or less to build selling for $500 or so. Big profits on digital gear.

I was at the guitar shop yesterday the new fender Tonemaster pro floor unit was selling for $2600 or so. what a rip!

[Naillerz78]

Following on re the Tonemaster..
Not sure what’s going on with Fenders modelling actually , their attempts at digital amps and floor units has not really been a big success. They can do very good modelling of their own amps but when it comes to overdriven or gained models like Marshall , Recto etc they sound really mushy and woofy ?. Strange.

[tapper mike]

I love the fender amp emulations in Tonemaster. And that's a full stop for me. I could care less about the other amps that they try to model. I love the fact that I'm not hearing aliasing that I hear in every other amp modeller on the market including my Pod Go. Which isn't a deal crusher for me. I play as best I can let the unit perform as best it can with the patches and let the rest go.

The reason why I don't have Fender Tonemaster myself is I have limited financial resources and I'd rather spend them elsewhere. This great MFX and that great guitar is not going to earn me fame and fortune.

With regards to Tim Pierce. He's a great musician and storyteller. He plays umteen guitars and when Paul Reed Smith offers Tim a Private Reserve with all the options he bites full into it. Claming that the PRS is the only guitar to have and that people who don't like PRS guitars are full of it.

Tim Pierce has a deep dive review of the Tone Master Pro gives it glowing reviews and then comes up with his own custom patches only to play the "I need to see the pedal on the floor so I can instantly adjust values on the fly. I take that with a grain of salt after watching Jon Herringtons rig rundown when Steely Dan was still touring. Herrington put tape over the knobs so he couldn't adjust them before during or after the show.

[zerocrossing]

I don't know why more modelling amps don't use solid state components and tubes combined with the digital models, they make so much difference to the sound quality.

Line 6 made the Spider Valve, with a tube section designed by Reinhold Bogner. I tried it and hated it, but that was probably the old amp modeling tech holding it back. If they made it again using the Helix modeling, I imagine it would sound a lot better.

All other digital amps are made with solid state components. When I was using my Tonex pedal with the Line 6 AmpliFi, it purely went through the solid state power section, with no digital processing involved. It was good (particularly for stereo effects!) but I personally prefer plugging in to my tube power amp.

Did you ever play through the DT50? that seemed like an interesting concept. I think I listened to a few demos at one point, and I thought it seemed pretty good. No?

[glokraw]

Following on re the Tonemaster..
Not sure what’s going on with Fenders modelling actually , their attempts at digital amps and floor units has not really been a big success. They can do very good modelling of their own amps but when it comes to overdriven or gained models like Marshall , Recto etc they sound really mushy and woofy ?. Strange.

Only a rumor, but some suspect a person(s) involved in preset creation at Fender has hearing issues, and retains the job out of company loyalty, despite presets that are not widely acclaimed for greatness.
If that is the case, such loyalty could be bad for the company as a whole. The hearing-loss issue as a whole means it's important to hear potential purchases with our own ears, especially if gear 'reviews' and personal opinions vary wildly. If Leon and Tim both like something, I'd be happy to try it in some shop.