real or model?

  • Thread starter Thread starter antichef
  • Start date Start date

which is real, which sounds better?

  • 1 is real, 2 is the model

    Votes: 15 51.7%

  • 2 is real, 1 is the model

    Votes: 8 27.6%

  • 1 sounds better

    Votes: 11 37.9%

  • 2 sounds better

    Votes: 10 34.5%
  • Total voters
    29
antichef

antichef

pornk rock
The only difference between these two MP3s:

1)


2)


is that the lead guitar in one of them is going through a "real" amp (reamped) -- in the other, the lead guitar is going through a software based amp model.

Can you tell which is which? Which one sounds better?

I'll post some more details in the next post in this thread -- for now, I'm trying to figure out how to make the poll work.

I made the poll multiple choice so that you could indicate both which you thought was real and which sounded better, but there's nothing to stop you, except your own conscience, from checking all the boxes, I guess.
 
Last edited:
OK - this is my 18 month old and me improvising around with the home recording studio equipment - she calls out to our cat Pete (depicted in my avatar) and I ad lib to poorly grafted loops that we created. Anyway, the point is the treatment of the leads, so here's more more background:

The model is from Logic Express 8's preset channel strip "Custom Stack", which uses "Guitar Amp Pro" for the amp model - which is the "US Combo 40W" with "British EQ" and the "UK 4x12 closed" cab with a "condenser" mic.

I ran the dry guitar signal using a nifty clever device I got from Naiant into an Epiphone model 101 from the mid 1960's with the original 10 inch speaker, which has been worked over recently by a very good amp tech, and has this tube complement: 12AT7 preamp, 6X4 rectifier, and EL84 power -- the preamp and power tubes are both GE JAN. I miced the amp with my now-trusty ACM-2, which has an Edcor transformer.

The guitar is a vietnamese-built SG style made from alder wood, using Gibson P-94 pickups.
 
Last edited:
I liked #2.

not reading your post, until later, it was a very bizarre surprise to hear the baby googoo stuff.

#1 sounded fuzzy and goo-gah, while #2 had more of a geegggeeeegagaga sound.

in your favor of music style, I will admit I thought bottled water was ridiculous and Rap would only be a comedy-music with Funky KoMadina....

so maybe baby goo-goo music will take over the entire world?
:rolleyes:

What do you call this type of music?
 
sorry -- I work for the baby, not the other way around :D (this is "home recording" after all...)

this is "baby bottle blues"

thanks for the listens -- keep'em coming!
 
Last edited:
Hey I got approved rep points from the OP this must mean I got it right:cool:

OH BTW I was just wondering... antichef, is that anything like antipasta?:confused:
:D
 
Interesting... IMO

I think once again this poll is just re-emphasizing the fact some people like different tones than others.

Black Sabbath when I hear Sample #1.

Sample 2, Montrose or Ted Nugent (Fender Twin's wide open sound)
 
i went for 2 and 2.

i thought it sounded warmer and more rounded, which could be indicative of a dynamic mic and some ambience.

then again, i've heard some nasty-ass miked amps that i'd take modeling over any day. not that #1 sounded nasty. i just thought #2 was more natural.

that's my story, and i'm stickin' to it.

when will you reveal the true answer?
 
I'm not kidding -- #1 really is the model, and #2 really is the amp :)
 
antichef said:
I'm not kidding -- #1 really is the model, and #2 really is the amp :)
Click to expand...

I believe you! You won't find me ever saying that a model can't beat an amp and a mic, because it can. This proves it!
 
I happened to like the second sample the best myself, though I must admit to listening to it on iBook speakers.....

I own that same software and happen to think it sounds pretty good as well, but when doing anything really dynamic it just falls apart, unless I just play track and then automate the knobs to change the sound as the dynamics adapt to the song...
 
personally, I prefer #2, but I didn't vote :)

I can be perfectly happy with modeling for a lot of lead lines like this one (which don't rely on feedback through the guitar). By splitting the signal and playing through a real amp as well as recording to digital, I bet I could get around that limitation, too, but doing that would tend to defeat a lot of the benefits of models.

I have more trouble with using models for rhythm guitar, and it's here that I can sometimes hear digital artifacts at low sampling rates. At 24/96 (like the sample here), I don't hear any artifacts, but still can't always get the sound right.
 
2 definitely...sounded more full and fat as opposed to a bit tinnier from the model
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top