It seems like Line6 kinda screwed people over

[Sleek Month]

But I can't buy a Brit J-900, Fender Deville, etc. And yet, I occasionally want to have the sound even if it is not right.

You're absolutely right: My JCM sounds much better than the POD, and my Fender Twin, and AC30 does too. Actually, come to think of it, my Hiwatt stack, and Mesa Triple Rectifier, as well as my vintage Fender Bassman put anything produced by the POd to absolute shame!!

Well, admittedly, I got a good deal,(small town music/pawn shop), but my jcm only set me back $325.

...that's why it kills me that peeps spend, what was it, $600 for pod pro or $1700 for a vetta?

Lunacy.

$325 is low, but if you keep your eye out and are patient, you can find one for around 5 bills usually.

As for the Hiwatt, Twin blah, blah, blah, that's where different preamp tubes come in. Try a 12au7 or 12at7 in the first preamp spot.

It requires no biasing, (power amp only), no wiring, and you can even hot-swap while you're amp is in standby.

I mainly use a 12au7 (About $10) right now. It has a lot less gain than the 12ax7, and really brings out a nice ringing tone, more reminiscent of an old overdriven bassman.

If that's still out of your budget, my other faves are a couple of little old tube amps I got off of ebay for $50-$100. Again, try different preamp tubes for more tones.

Any guitar player owes it to himself to own a tube amp, and in my opinion, a shure sm57 for those projects where you need to sound amazing.

You gotta check out the 635a. My problem with 57's is that they're a little icy in the high midrange, and distorted amps put out a lot of really bad stuff right in the '57's sweet spot.

The 635a cuts by it's nature cuts the ultra lows and the weird highs, leaving you with a really warm sound...plus, it's an omnidirectional dynamic, so positioning isn't as important as with a 57, (Where an inch can change the whole sound), and it's a bit more balanced because you can get sort of center (bite) and cone (beef) at the same time.

...mmm....beef...

-S.

[Lawnmower Of The Damned]

Sleek, I respect your opinion, but as a long time Vetta II owner I can't help but wonder how much time you spent tweaking. These things can be a complicated bit of kit, and there's much more to it than selecting an amp model and playing.

When done well I dare say the average person will not be able to tell the difference between a patch on the Vetta and a real amp. At this point the Pod is in use by hundreds of popular mainstream bands and it's safe to say that it's sound (Even if not identical to the real thing) is well liked by the majority of music listeners.

When I scroll back to the Vetta patches I made a year ago I cringe. My taste has changed a lot but my Vetta can accomodate me no matter what I request, once I got over the steep learning curve anyway.

[Sleek Month]

Sleek, I respect your opinion, but as a long time Vetta II owner I can't help but wonder how much time you spent tweaking. These things can be a complicated bit of kit, and there's much more to it than selecting an amp model and playing.

Well, with the pod I tweaked the hell out of that thing, doing lots with the computer interface/program.

Basically, I was so impressed with the concept that I bought one, and was determined to get what I needed out of it...but it just didn't deliver. I ended up taking it back on the last day I could get a refund.

Don't get me wrong, I'm no tube purist, I like the sound of frying "analog" transitors as much as the next guy, (Think Randall RG100ht, tech21 Sansamp and trademark 60, and I play a Crate, of all things, in my country band right now...), but me and modelling just don't get along.

I played in a band with a guy who used the Vetta stuff. It was okay. He was a big distorto guy...I would have preferred a little more raw edge to his sound, but it worked for him, I suppose.

BTW: To the original poster: Do you use the computer tweaking software with your pod? I remember there were some functions that couldn't be accessed otherwise (Including effects parameters and, I think, some speaker sim modes, including "no sim at all" which is nice as an effect). It might help you find more what you're looking for.

-S.

[Resonance]

I sorta see where Controller_C is coming from tho'.

I bought the original Pod, upgraded it a year later to the POD 2.0 chip, sold that a year later so I could get a PodXT - unfortunately it's not like a hardware synth. How old is the Korg Triton? I bought the Triton ProX when it was originally released all those years ago and it's still my main studio controller and stage synth. It's really kind of a bitch when a year goes by and your shit is out of date - especially when it's in the hardware realm.

And the Pod Pro was SO much more expensive than the Pod - just for S/PDIF... It's a kick in the balls.

I sympathize.

[soulkraka]

But heres a hint for any amp modeller, run the outs through an analog compressor and then into yer soundcard. It will sound much better.

run your guitar through the pod and then mic up the speakers...sounds better to me.

[Lunch Money]

People who don't understand that recording and editing technique fit into this equation in a seriously important way need to have large pieces of Feta cheese thrown at them until they beg for mercy.

Think about it-- I could have the best amp in the world, and suck at recording the sound of it, or not have the right environment and/or equipment to do it justice.

I could have an amp modeler and know exactly how to deal with it, which effects and reverb to add, and make it sound way better than the tube amp.

---

Then there's the price equation. OK, so I manage to find a steal of an amp-- a JCM900 and cab for a mere $1,000. A bargain, really. $120 for a Shure SM57 (hey, it's a classic) and a mixer or pre-amp for it, to get the signal into my soundcard ($50 if you go on the cheap, but your sound will suffer). Let's assume I'm pretty shit-hot, I have a good-sounding room, and I've decoupled the amp from the floor and have eliminated phase issues with the bass by installing some bass traps (I used some scrap materials and ingenuity and managed to do it for free). So I finally have my great sound, and all for only about $1,200 and some knowledge.

OR...

Assuming still that I know what I'm doing (hey, gotta be fair), I take the modeler I most prefer (A SansAmp GT2 is a surefire classic!) and have used my host's native effects. And have gotten it... say... 90% as good as the real thing. (Engineers have recorded and preferred the SansAmp for certain sounds. Just like an amp, it's just another flavour and another way to accomplish a goal; however, I'll be generous and admit that the real thing sounded better for this track).

So I'm out $150. $35, actually, if you get the Behringer GDI21 instead of the SansAmp GT2. Let's say I got the real thing-- $150 vs. $1,200 is a hefty difference for a (subjectively speaking, since such things can't be quantified) what... 10% difference?

---

NOW, you've gotten your sounds into your host. Let's assume you did a good job, whichever method you used. As it turns out, your guitar track is no more important or dominant than the keyboard, bass, and drums. In fact, for a good chunk of the song, your guitar is a clean toned (except for some good ol' flanger!), arpeggiated bit while the bass and drums lend the majority of the support for the lead vocal, which is the focus of this song.

NOW where is your $1,200 getting you? Hrm... well, considering that classic albums have been made with little personal-sized combos and YES-- judicious use of the once-ubiquitous SansAmp--, I'd say not very far.

----

At the end of the day, only guitarists who think that their guitar is the most important part of the song really care that much. Worse yet, people forget that the 'perfect tone' you got is often drastically altered in the mix. Big deal, so you plug in your guitar and your amp tone rocks compared to your modeler. Once it's in the mix and the producer/engineer realizes that it needs a heavy cut in the bass frequencies and a bit more presence in the mids, it's been altered from that 'magic' tone your dialed in, anyways. An engineer and a producer knows that the tone should fit the song, and not the other way around.

---

What about the noise issue? Who among us has the right room and the right environment (including the people living with us) to record a cranked amp? Most of us are home musicians, not studio pros.

---

Now, before anybody gets TOO defensive, or thinks that I'M being too defensive, I'll freely admit that I'd love to have a room full of tube amps, including all the usual suspects like the AC30, JCM900, Boogie, Twin, Bassman, etc. There's nothing better than turning up an amp and letting loose-- I can't say much from recent experience because my only real tube amp is a Garnet (a classic tube amp, mind you!) that needs an overhaul. But I've plugged in plenty of times and nothing beats that hair-on-your-neck-standing-up feeling, or the pure rush of feeling/hearing that crackle and letting thunder echo out as you smack into that power chord.

But a certain objectivity has to be developed about being a recording musician, and although I'm a guitarist first and a "home producer/engineer" second, I freely acknowledge that there are VERY diminished returns when going from a sim to the real deal, particularly considering the cost, but also including the tone. Purists also tend to be elitists, I'm afraid-- these are the same people who won't touch a Parker Fly because it uses composite materials in addition to real wood. But the Fly is a great guitar with a beautiful tone.

You can feel free to crank your (the royal "you" since I have no clue what each person's studio looks like, and some people WILL have properly treated rooms) amp, acoustically coupled to the floor and with lots of room reflections, pissing off family and neighbors and possibly not even getting the right tone for the job. I'll stick to virtual and hardware simulations for now, thanks. And I bet 98% of the people who could listen to my tracks would never know the difference.

----

On a related note: ever since I started using virtual amps, I've made it a point to listen to guitar tone on the radio, especially for tracks that are KNOWN to use a real tube amp, etc. I have to say, when you're REALLY listening to tracks, there are some really crap-tastic tones, made with "real" amps, that still somehow did not detract from the songs being 'classics'. Goes to show that it's really about the song, after all.

Greg

[edited to change the order of the 'diminished returns' sentence, which I had written backwards but which I think everyone understood anyhow]

[bduffy]

Well said, Sir!

[birrbits]

run your guitar through the pod and then mic up the speakers...sounds better to me.

[DevonB]

And the Pod Pro was SO much more expensive than the Pod - just for S/PDIF... It's a kick in the balls.

I sympathize.

That's the part that cracked me up. Wow, I can get spdif... so I can have a clean distorted signal.... I stuck with the Pod 2.0. I don't have 'perfect' results, but it gets me by.

Devon

[feyshay]

Lunch Money--that was very well-stated. I'm in agreement. Even so--I still like to mic an amp as one option. I have a Shure Beta 58a. It's been nice for live vocals. Would others see this as suitable for micing an amp. Also, what to use for an ambient mic--a condenser? Any advantages of the SM57 over the Beta 58A for micing amps. I wouldn't see the 635a as better than the Beta 58a for this purpose either. I'm thinking Beta 58A for close to the amp and a condenser for further back ambient? Any recommendations?
The other thing is that to get 2 mics and the clean signal, I'm thinking I would need a greater than 2 input sound card (I now have an Edirol UA-25). Any work arounds so that I would not need to upgrade my soundcard and still have 2 mics and the clean signal?

[jens]

Ugh.

I personally hate the sound of modelled amps, period.

I personally couldn't care less about what things you hate or love, period.

[Sleek Month]

Then there's the price equation. OK, so I manage to find a steal of an amp-- a JCM900 and cab for a mere $1,000. A bargain, really. $120 for a Shure SM57 (hey, it's a classic) and a mixer or pre-amp for it, to get the signal into my soundcard ($50 if you go on the cheap, but your sound will suffer). Let's assume I'm pretty shit-hot, I have a good-sounding room, and I've decoupled the amp from the floor and have eliminated phase issues with the bass by installing some bass traps (I used some scrap materials and ingenuity and managed to do it for free). So I finally have my great sound, and all for only about $1,200 and some knowledge.

Ummm...

Well, as stated, I paid $29 for my mic and $325 for my amp. My other favorite tube amp, I got for $50. It's a '50's no-name chassis valco. You can get them all the time for that price.

If you must skew the numbers in your favor fine. Otherwise, incorporate these.

Assuming still that I know what I'm doing (hey, gotta be fair), I take the modeler I most prefer (A SansAmp GT2 is a surefire classic!) and have used my host's native effects.

The Sansamp GT2 isn't a modeller. Tech21 doesn't make modelling gear.

...and I do like the Tech21 stuff.

What about the noise issue? Who among us has the right room and the right environment (including the people living with us) to record a cranked amp? Most of us are home musicians, not studio pros.

The noise issue can be overcome with a (very) little ingenuity.

I took an old 1x15" cabinet, unloaded it so it's just a box, padded it with foam, put in a 10" celestion and bafffle and ran my mic in there.

...so, it's completly isolated. I can play and record my (or any) amp in my living room with no background noise.

So, let's see, that's price, quality and noise taken care of. What was the point again ?


-S.
-S.

[Lunch Money]

I didn't skew anything in my favour. If you managed to get a JCM900 (with cabs, of course, or it's not making any sound) for $325 and an SM57 for $30 then you're a bloody miracle worker-- the exception, not the rule. So the price issue still remains. I WAS fair in going with the "real" SansAmp rather than the Behringer GDI21 which is only $35 after all. And, I was quoting new prices, not used-- I'm sure a used GT2 can be had for less.

Let's take it to extremes, then. You got your amp and mic for that price, and I'll even grant you that you already owned your mixer regardless. Noise issues aside, you're out $350. If we're talking about the extremes of price, let's say I got my GDI21. $35. That's still a big difference for people on a budget. When you're living cheque to check, $315 (the difference) isn't exactly pocket money.

Moving on--

Of course the GT2 is a modeler. It's just not a digital modeler. What the heck else would you call it? It emulates an amp, cab, and mic placement. There's no other word for it except "simulator" but that's just rhetoric.

Your 'isolation' cab surely wasn't free. It requires HAVING a spare cab to begin with, and if you're honestly saying that regular foam will properly isolate the sound then I have to question your honesty, because regular foam will NOT accomplish the job. Meaning, you need specialty foam, too.

Sorry, but exceptional situations aside (your miracle foam, extra cab, and unheard of amp bargain) the price and noise are NOT addressed yet. My points weren't meant to diminish anyone else's perspective, so I don't understand the snarky tone. No need to be defensive in the face of furious logic.

I DO, however, agree about the $50 amp-- I think it's wonderful to use unexpected amps and sounds to find elusive tones. But, since we're comparing similar amp sounds (in this case a Marshall), that doesn't really factor into the debate. If we're talking about unique tones, I could just have easily started talking about how you can get a great sound for FREE using available VSTs.

Also unmentioned was the fact that the GT2 has a "mere" 3 amps models (as opposed to, well, one) and digital modelers often have dozens. I didn't bother addressing that point since I was going under the assumption that we're stacking Marshall vs. Marshall. But if you want to split hairs, each additional amp model multiplies the value by an extra factor. Still only using my example, if you want to talk about cost-per, it's really only $50 ($12 for the Behringer version) for the single amp model being discussed.

And finally-- most importantly of all-- it's easy to throw up red herrings when the main point still remains unaddressed: the amp sound's role in the song. Nobody cares if your have fire-breathing tone when your guitar is supposed to be only one of many contributing factors to the song. Of course, if your song is meant as a showcase for guitar-playing and the guitar IS in the spotlight, then using a 'real amp' does take a slightly more significant role. Again back to the other hand, Dimitar Nabaltov seems to be doing just fine with virtual amps and his pedals.

Greg

[herodotus]

Guitarists.......





Sigh....

[jtxx000]

at least we keep a consistant tempo