The Dire State of Guitar Amp Sims

[paramita123]

I don't know if the Klevgrand one is any good but I like how it looks

https://klevgrand.com/products/stark

The UI is certainly free of fake hardware looks which is nice on the eyes.
Sounds good too !
Perhaps a good option for those who want an easy package.
Also for $80 it is not cheap and many free plugins can get similar results.

Overall all these amp sims still only try to recreate hardware stuff, I am waiting to see more innovative creations like the synths plugins have been seeing for a while !

[pekbro]

Just now playing with TH-U 2 for the first time since getting it, the UI isn't really much better imo, still for free, I can't complain...

I definitely preferred the UI for Supercabinet before...

[ToneEG]

AUTO-ADMIN: Non-MP3, WAV, OGG, SoundCloud, YouTube, Vimeo, Twitter and Facebook links in this post have been protected automatically. Once the member reaches 5 posts the links will function as normal.

Interesting thread. Disclosure first: I’m building EG Tone, so I’m speaking as a developer rather than a neutral user.

I agree with the general point that a lot of amp sims already solve the basic tone problem, but the workflow/UX side still feels behind. For the beginner/intermediate guitar players I’m aiming at, the confusing part is often not “which virtual amp is most accurate?” but things like input gain, latency, preset overload, controller mapping, and simply understanding what each control is supposed to do.

That is the angle I’m trying to work on: plugin + standalone app, short help text for every control/effect, and a practice path that does not require opening a DAW first.

Site for context: https://egtone.com/en-US (https://egtone.com/en-US)

Curious what people here think is more valuable for an amp sim in 2026: deeper MIDI/modulation features, or a much clearer beginner workflow with sane defaults?

[metalifuxx]

Interesting thread. Disclosure first: I’m building EG Tone, so I’m speaking as a developer rather than a neutral user.

I agree with the general point that a lot of amp sims already solve the basic tone problem, but the workflow/UX side still feels behind. For the beginner/intermediate guitar players I’m aiming at, the confusing part is often not “which virtual amp is most accurate?” but things like input gain, latency, preset overload, controller mapping, and simply understanding what each control is supposed to do.

That is the angle I’m trying to work on: plugin + standalone app, short help text for every control/effect, and a practice path that does not require opening a DAW first.

Site for context: https://egtone.com/en-US

Curious what people here think is more valuable for an amp sim in 2026: deeper MIDI/modulation features, or a much clearer beginner workflow with sane defaults?

I think it starts with knowing how to dial in your own rig and what real controls do on an amp and pedals and how EQ/tonehsaping works across different tonestacks. You’d be surprised how many guitar players, including ones that gig live regularly, don’t really know how to use their own pedals/amps and dial it in for a tone they want or several go to tones, or know how to tweak it on the fly to fix cutting through a band mix that isn’t mic’d up or going thru a PA/monitors with a sound guy. If you don’t understand those very basic concepts, you’re going to feel lost and overwhelmed when you open up any ampsim, basic/simple or advanced. I wouldn’t even mention midi/controller/parameter assigning if someone cant get past doing basic tone shaping/signal path management…midi would seem like needing to have a PhD or masters degree if you don’t understand basic tone shaping and signal chain routing etc. I’ve shown regular gigging musicians ampsim software before (that have never used it) thinking it would just be intuitive to them, but it wasn’t at all because they don’t really even know how to use the real life hardware properly. The software plugin Ampsim community of users is a smaller niche than you think, and we just assume that everyone has used it before or would be intuitive enough to just start using it with no prior computer DAW experience.

[jamcat]

I agree with the general point that a lot of amp sims already solve the basic tone problem, but the workflow/UX side still feels behind.

The biggest problem I see with ampsims is the speaker interaction. Everyone pretty much uses static convolution for that. But speakers aren't static, they move, and they have their own dynamically responsive compression and distortion that reacts to the player. The louder the sound they're reproducing, the more distorted it is.

I used to use AmpliTube, because of its quality, versatility, and wide range of gear. It looks great, has just about any gear you could want, and is fun and intuitive to work with. I could recreate the precise rig of a famous artist, and dial in their settings, and on the surface, the tone would be incredibly close. But when you take an isolated guitar track and A/B it with the ampsim recreation, you immediately notice that the ampsim version sounds flat and gauzy, like you're listening to a mimeograph copy of the original tone.

AmpliTube has the added complication of using layers of both convolution and deconvolution to first remove the "imprint" of the original captured speaker or mic before artificially replacing it with another. But even without that, a single pass of static convolution is going to leave you with that telltale ampsim tone.