KVR Audio

A3ntar · Post by **A3ntar** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:36 am

Doesn't playing Live in fornt of an Amp create feedback effect that cannot obviously be reproduced by software Amp sims? ( unless you play live with the ampsin on an external speaker? )

ChimeraMan · Post by **ChimeraMan** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:23 am

Ahh, my mistake! If you're talking about playing live, don't bother with an amp simulator. Use an amp instead. Guitarists have been doing it for years, I presume it must be a good idea.

Don't forget the speaker cab.

putte · Post by **putte** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:30 am

.. i am not a guitarist in that sense, but i play/record lots of guitars for my filmscores, my jobs and for both of my bands. i do this, since years, with Amplitube 1 .. and it always made me happy.

i´m not in the position to really compare real amps with it. the only thing my ears could judge were the comparisons between the first pod and Guitar rig.
well, i still went on being happy with Amplitube.

now that AT2 seems to be on its way i am curious and even excited to see the follow up of my fave guitaramp plugin.

there you got it: i´ll buy it ..

putte

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 8:41 am

A3ntar: Think outside the bun, man!

Now, I'm not saying that software replaces a real amp. That's not me and will never be me. Nor is it someone like Sascha. But let's all come together and think laterally for a second:

The 'nice' kind of feedback is just sympathetic vibration. It can be achieved with a little 1/2" speaker held directly in front of your strings, as long as the speaker is pumping out whatever it is that you're playing at the time. A wee little feedback loop.

Surely you can imagine playing your amp sim through some real speakers (whether they're actually guitar cabs or not) for the same effect? It'll work. It HAS to, according to the laws of physics.

Now, as I mentioned on p.8 or so, if you're using just headphones, you're right-- it's not going to happen. The effect can be simulated in software, but it hasn't been FULLY successful yet. BBA have a very promising product, but it's kind of on the back burner right now. I don't imagine there will EVER be a software that truly simulates it, because you can't just do it with a captured guitar signal. That's not the same thing as your physical strings physically vibrating in physical sympathy with the waveform.

But, we might get close enough to make it a useful effect, at least.

Back to my point: as long as you're not using headphones, it's achievable. The easiest way to test it is without your background mix-- just you and your amp sim pumping through the monitors or hifi. Stand in front of the speaker until the strings start to vibrate. If you can drive the strings with a 1" speaker, you can certainly do it with your monitors or a hifi.

Once you've proven to yourself that it can be done, and you want to use it as an effect on a track, the next thing to do is brew up your own way of monitoring and feeding back at the same time-- if you try to put your whole mix through the same speakers, you won't likely have much success because the guitar's waves won't be isolated.

Greg

morelia · Post by **morelia** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:12 am

What would make AT2 the ultimate for me would be if individual components (amps, speakers cabs, FX pedals) could be used on their own). Man would that me sweet. A great way to consume less CPU I imagine.

stag · Post by **stag** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 9:34 am

I can get feedback playing with phones, i just dial the I\0 to optimal values, i get it with VG-88, AT or guitar suite, here i´m defying the laws of physics, O and that´s a pretty musical effect.

The whole thing about guitarrist and gear was ridiculous on the 60´s and still is today.
I like the roaring of a JCM 800, pumping air on my trousers, now getting it to sound rigth on a PA or record that´s another story.

AT, POD, Guitar Rig, do it a lot better than i, it could be worst than a seasoned engineer with all kinds of gear to record and process a real amp, but AT and the likes, do it definitly a lot better than i and the engineers i know, being it a VST you can reamp things or process it latter on with AT3, which will come with a full 4x12 closed back.

Bye.

championrabbit · Post by **championrabbit** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 10:26 am

Lots of opinions about something nobody has tried...

Vervil · Post by **Vervil** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:18 am

I guess some people will not like what I am saying but:

How big percent of the market for amp simulator of any kind are professional musicians with a lot of experience in studio, recording guitars or regular basis, really? Most of music hobbyist don't know how miced amp sounds like thru decent monitors anyway. I have heard a lot of different ugly sounds from people using amp simulators, (software or hardware) claming that they are very satisfied with their investment. So there is one truth no one likes: Not all people are informed enough, and not all people have a good taste and musicality, no pun intended. It is just like all those ugly models of shoes in the store, or some piece of clothes that you would think no one will buy. Well, actually someone will buy it, and think it is beautiful.
Also, there is a tendency to make amp simulators (and some modeling amps) to sound very flattering with tone that for person without enough experience sounds like a real thing, made to persuade potential customer to buy it, instead of sounding sonically useful for recording.
Naturally I may be wrong, and simply all this is best shot for developers, and technology is simply still not up there.
There is NO emulation that is able to record guitar tracks that act like miced amp in mix (for now, I hope), especially when it comes to distorted sounds. It can sound very close to real thing on its own, but in mix, it is just a big mess, most of the time.
There is obvious tendency to spend time creating product that is doing a lot of things, and have many possibilities, pedal emulations, fancy effects, routing possibilities, but amp simulations themselves are not up there to task. Why?
If someone would put out product that is just a plain simulation of Boogie amp, sounding REALLY close to the real thing, with just a few different boxes, without any other effects or simulations, and ask 400$ bucks, I think there would be a lot of people buying it, at least I would rather cash out for good simulation of one amp that would allow me to record serious guitar tracks direct, than for all those all-in-one "solutions".
Not that I am luddite, against digital stuff and software, I use Line 6 stuff, and tried all other simulations, and it think they can work well for some cleaner sounds that are not so important in the mix, and for sketching song, laying down some rough tracks fast while composing, but that's it.

And yes, there is no sense in bashing A2 even before it is out, but I think that slightly negative tone in this thread can tell a lot about general attitude towards existing amp simulations and if people are satisfied with what they get for the money to developers, If they actually want to listen.

Because for now it seems that simulators are selling not because they are that good, but because there is growing need for that kind of solution, and musicians will take anything that works, and most of the time marketing hype and not the sound itself is selling stuff in lot of situations.

Plexi Head · Post by **Plexi Head** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:47 am

Lunch Money wrote:The 'nice' kind of feedback is just sympathetic vibration. It can be achieved with a little 1/2" speaker held directly in front of your strings, as long as the speaker is pumping out whatever it is that you're playing at the time. A wee little feedback loop.

Greg

What he said.

Plexi Head · Post by **Plexi Head** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 11:49 am

championrabbit wrote:Lots of opinions about something nobody has tried...

Opinions or speculation?

Beardedone · Post by **Beardedone** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 1:06 pm

Forget it. I'll just play acoustic unplugged until this is all sorted out.

BTW my V-Amp sounds way better than AT1. No digital sheen and less artificial - not perfect but satisfying enough. And for what it's worth, iZotope Trash is infinitely better in terms of flexibility and sound quality. And they got the message regarding iLok. Ik MM hasn't.

Cosmic Bandito · Post by **Cosmic Bandito** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 2:42 pm

The silver lining is there is lots of competiton for these guitar interface products, and that should push product development. The not so great thing, as I see it, is the marketing trend is moving away from the pro-sumer market to a more dumbed-down audience. NI's recent offerings and AT'2 teaser seem to reveal this to an extent. If I had to guess why people on this forum are alarmed at AT2, just add together the dongle, the price, the 'USB' hardware, and the fake tits in the teaser (the more intelligent KVR guitarists probably prefer real)and the handwriting is on the wall. I guess they have to make their money somewhere. I'm saving my pennies for a guitar solution next year and I'm leaning towords Vox Tonelab (hopefully there will be a V2

), Waves GTR, or the new POD offering although I'm open to anything that comes out (who knows maybe I'll end up with a small tube amp). For the record I've tried AT1 and it sounds pretty nice when I play delicate stuff in compositions and so forth, but If I want to get down and dirty It's just not there on any sim, doesn't matter how many virtual stomp boxes they add - more to do with the response and the limits of virtual and so forth. And that's the crux of the whole soft amp dilema.

I think a hardware box with software control is the way forward. But I'm just a hobbiest with an opinion

nothing more.

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 4:52 pm

stag wrote:I can get feedback playing with phones, i just dial the I\0 to optimal values, i get it with VG-88, AT or guitar suite, here i´m defying the laws of physics, O and that´s a pretty musical effect.

You'll have to describe what you're doing better in order for me to get it. Are your guitar's strings vibrating in sympathy to the physical output of a speaker somewhere?

If not, then you've just proven that you don't know what you're talking about.

Whatever effect you've achieved, I'm sure it's very musical and wonderful, but it's not sympathetic feedback. And since I know that AT and GS do not have simulated sympathetic feedback, I'm now quite curious about what the heck you're on about. Saying "Optimal I/O values" is a vague sort of semi-explanation that sounds like you're saying something; however, most of us recognize that you are not.

AT, POD, Guitar Rig, do it a lot better than i, it could be worst than a seasoned engineer with all kinds of gear to record and process a real amp, but AT and the likes, do it definitly a lot better than i and the engineers i know, being it a VST you can reamp things or process it latter on with AT3, which will come with a full 4x12 closed back.

I agree with this part. I've said time and time again that I'd rather use an amp sim because I simply don't have the gear, (amps and microphones) or the space (a reasonable room even... my space is a reverby echoey little sound-reflecting horror show). Some people DO have the space, but a lot of people when talking about "real amp sound" are just talking bullocks that they've never tried. You can spot'em a mile away.

Greg

mondo tormento · Post by **mondo tormento** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:05 pm

When are they going to offer a demo of this amp sim with, in their words, 'super modeling'? The natives are getting restless, they want to judge!

Lunch Money · Post by **Lunch Money** » Thu Oct 06, 2005 5:31 pm

Vervil wrote:I guess some people will not like what I am saying

Well, before I get into it, at least consider that it might ALSO be the WAY you're saying it that some people won't like. An important distinction, though I often find that the two go hand in hand for some unimaginable reason.

How big percent of the market for amp simulator of any kind are professional musicians with a lot of experience in studio, recording guitars or regular basis, really?

A pretty big percent. You are speculating here because for whatever reason, you're assuming that guitarists would always rather have the 'real deal'-- and to have that, they need money. Famous musicians have money, ergo they must use the 'real deal'? I know where you're coming from, but it's flawed logic, and also simply a flawed subjective assumption, which is pretty damn tough to pull off but somehow you've done it.

Now, since I don't have any more "facts" than you do, the following is also subjective, but at least I'm not trying to pass myself off for something I'm not:

- First point, since it's the quickest to get out of the way, is that not all 'professional' guitarists, musicians, or engineers are rich. Just because you make your living doing something doesn't mean that you're making enough money to throw at an entire line-up of boutique amps. So you've gotta rethink your definition of "professional".

- Next, even an ultra-high-end studio might not (without the facts, I'll even go out on a limb and say WON'T) have all those amps on-hand. Sometimes they'll rent from a local place, or call up a friend they know with "This awesome amp" and sort it out. But that's not always feasible.

- A REAL guitarist (well, in my opinion and that of many other people, but not a universal "truth") cares only about the song and what's right for it. They couldn't give a crap if it comes from a real amp or a sim. Let's say for the sake of argument, they're using AT2 just as a way of quickly 'testing out' all kinds of different amps so that they can then go rent the "real thing" for the recording that will make it to the record. They settle on a JCM800, go and get one, and track the guitar part. Later on, they're doing an A/B compared to the AT2 "scratch" track and find that they really DO prefer the sound of the AT2. They will then use it. The guitarist and engineer will NEVER say, "Well, it sounds better, but it's not real. Let's use the real one just so that we can say we used the real thing." It makes no sense.

You would be absolutely floored at the number of times a 'simmed' guitar has been used on a real, commercially released, multi-platinum-selling track. Ever since the release of the SansAmp (the first 'simulated' amp to really make people tilt their ears), it has been VERY popular to at least try it out. I have read a great many interviews, having been a Guitar Player subscriber since 1992. And while that doesn't give me a statistical "fact" that I can pull up, I can tell you with certainty that many of the artists have used the SansAmp. More recently, it has become quite popular for artists to list the POD XT as one of their main studio components, too.

And guess what... they're all professionals....

Most of music hobbyist don't know how miced amp sounds like thru decent monitors anyway.

Probably or at least partly true; however....

I have heard a lot of different ugly sounds from people using amp simulators, (software or hardware) claming that they are very satisfied with their investment.

Possibly because the simulated version is already often taking care of things-- meaning that they don't NEED to have ever miced a Vox AC30 with a ribbon mic in order to know by using their EARS that they're getting a specific sound that they like, by using their amp sim. Also, your argument equates experience with taste and hearing. If I'm mixing a track that's done 'virtually', I can still tell the times that it's sounding like crap or the times it's sounding good. Isn't that all that's important? Who can say? There are times when I've been working on a song and have said, "It's not digital and crappy enough sounding yet."

Now, to give you a TOUCH of credit because I don't want to just sit here and slam you: I've yet to be truly satisfied with a simulated 'thick, sustaining, yet CLEAN(ish) tone coming out of an amp sim. They ALL seem to have just a touch too much 'fizz' for my liking. But crunch? WHoooo baby. Lots of amp sims are capable of delivering some good crunch.

So there is one truth no one likes: Not all people are informed enough, and not all people have a good taste and musicality, no pun intended.

I don't see a pun that COULD have been intended.

I agree that it's a truth, but I wouldn't say it's a truth that no one likes.

I meet people all the time that say, "Meh, I have no sense of musicality," or "You really listen to it on those levels? I'm just listening to the beat". I think people admit it all the time.

It is just like all those ugly models of shoes in the store, or some piece of clothes that you would think no one will buy. Well, actually someone will buy it, and think it is beautiful.

Exactly! OK, so you DO see the point of Amp sims after all.

Sorry, I was wrong about you; however, I'm not going to go back and edit my post now. Too much time invested.

Also, there is a tendency to make amp simulators (and some modeling amps) to sound very flattering with tone that for person without enough experience sounds like a real thing, made to persuade potential customer to buy it, instead of sounding sonically useful for recording.

Yes, a lot of presets have a bizarre amount of delay and reverb on them. Luckily, as 'real' guitarists, we all get to design our presets from the ground-up, OR if we're truly happy with the presets, meh... I guess that's good enough, no?

Naturally I may be wrong, and simply all this is best shot for developers, and technology is simply still not up there.

A debatable point.

There is NO emulation that is able to record guitar tracks that act like miced amp in mix (for now, I hope), especially when it comes to distorted sounds. It can sound very close to real thing on its own, but in mix, it is just a big mess, most of the time.

A very vague and insubstantiated statement. So you're telling me that EVERY time you hear a guitar-based song (especially a distorted guitar song) on the radio, you're able to identify with absolute authority that it's a real amp, based on the fact that it's either a huge mess or not? HRmm... sketchy. As for "a miced amp sounds better in the mix", it's like this mantra that gets passed along from person to person, and nobody really knows what it means but it sounds good and authoritative. But it doesn't look at the other side:

There are MANY more ways to screw up micing an amp, and therefore ensuring that it sounds horrible in the mix.

Subjectively speaking, I would disagree, anyhow. I would say that most amp sims are still a little bit of a "giveaway" when you hear them individually (and you listen hard), but end up sounding just fine once they're in the mix. Perhaps your production and mixing technique just needs some work.

There is obvious tendency to spend time creating product that is doing a lot of things, and have many possibilities...at least I would rather cash out for good simulation of one amp that would allow me to record serious guitar tracks direct, than for all those all-in-one "solutions".

I agree with you here. Give me quality over quantity any day.

Not that I am luddite, against digital stuff and software, I use Line 6 stuff, and tried all other simulations, and it think they can work well for some cleaner sounds that are not so important in the mix, and for sketching song, laying down some rough tracks fast while composing, but that's it.

"Luddite"... a great word! I still disagree, though. I think it's the 'slightly overdriven' (ie. almost clean) sounds that are still lacking in any sim I've tried. The totally clean sounds are good, and the distorted sounds are decent enough.

So much of "heavily distorted" sound depends on your knowledge of your instrument. If you don't know how to USE a heavily-distorted sound properly, it's going to sound like crap, period. Technique being equal, I think the sims are currently doing a fine job of distortion.

Here's a guess... and it's totally just speculation... I suspect that people aren't happy with the "mega gain" sounds of amp sims because they're approaching it the wrong way. Let's say I want to crank out a Rectified sound, but I'm not somebody who owns a Rectifier. I turn to an amp sim, and... "Jeez... this doesn't sound ANYTHING like the players I know who use Rectifiers!" so I just assume that the sim must suck. Well, if I actually owned the Rectifier, I'd know that I had to dial in the right sound and use the right technique, too. And if I knew those guitarists and engineers, they'd tell me about how a big part of the sound was production technique (layering, varying EQ, blending some clean tone in to preserve pick attack and add definition).

You can't just plug into such an amp sim and expect to sound like a recording. Now, I know that's not what YOU'RE saying because you've already agreed that making 'presets' to compensate for the lack of realism is a poor idea. But I'm sure there are people out there who DO just audition a Rectifier sound and say, "This just ain't right!" without understanding the production techniques needed, too.

I think that slightly negative tone in this thread can tell a lot about general attitude towards existing amp simulations and if people are satisfied with what they get for the money to developers, If they actually want to listen.

Well... I'm mostly debating with you here, but on some level, I DO agree... there's not an amp sim out there yet that's the be-all and end-all, and people are hoping that it arrives so that we can finally live the dream of "owning" all those amps.

Because for now it seems that simulators are selling not because they are that good, but because there is growing need for that kind of solution, and musicians will take anything that works, and most of the time marketing hype and not the sound itself is selling stuff in lot of situations.

Fair enough. There IS a demand, and there IS a lot of hype coming from some companies.

Just so that I'm clear here... I have debated the points you've made that were spoken as fact but which are just opinion. I'm not saying you're absolutely wrong here--> BUT, there ARE good tones coming from sims, they ARE used by professionals, there ARE situations in which the sound of the sim (the sound-- I'm not only talking about convenience here!) beats out the 'real deal', and the technology IS believable, especially combined with good production technique.

It's a mistake to think that having a 'real' amp and a microphone will make your tracks sound more 'alive' (another common misconception) or somehow 'better', because owning those 2 things isn't nearly enough. And a neophyte home studio recording guitarist who gets crappy results from a crappy room and mic (even if the amp itself is awesome!) will be sorely disappointed.

To properly mic any amp at all (keeping in mind that some 'crappy' amps are exactly right for the job!) you need: the right space, the right mic, and the right technique. I'd wager that many of us are lacking at least one of those things, in addition to the multitude of amps that we're lacking.

Greg

Amplitube 2 Jimi Hendrix RELEASED this month!!!