
kcearl
I see deaf people
You might have...some of it has been on the radio.
I dont listen to the radio....
You might have...some of it has been on the radio.
You should...you would find out your stuff went out of style decades ago...lol.
This thread would have ended seven or eight pages ago had you just said, "that's cool, I don't personally like modelers but if you're happy with the results you're getting, right on!"
Well guys…yes…I’m talking about my own preferences, not as some absolute that must be adopted by everyone on the planet!
......
Like a said…these are MY preferences…you guys use whatever works for you.
Personally I find it weird to see a band on a stage at my local amplitheater that are using in-ear monitors and line 6 foot controllers for tone...it makes the stage look bare...but Ive seen that several times.
...then EZ came back again looking to prove to me I was wrong about MY feelings about modelers.
you're an idiot. nowhere did i ever tell you that you were wrong about your preferences, and nowhere did i say that i use modelers for my recordings. i said there was a market for it, much like there MIGHT be for this mic. then you said that one should just buy the real amp because modelers blah blah blah.
dipshit. you. also, you suck and your music is retarded. you've been playing guitar your entire life and you still have no concept of what notes go together in a solo.![]()
you're an idiot. nowhere did i ever tell you that you were wrong about your preferences, and nowhere did i say that i use modelers for my recordings. i said there was a market for it, much like there MIGHT be for this mic. then you said that one should just buy the real amp because modelers blah blah blah.
dipshit. you. also, you suck and your music is retarded. you've been playing guitar your entire life and you still have no concept of what notes go together in a solo.![]()
you're an idiot. nowhere did i ever tell you that you were wrong about your preferences, and nowhere did i say that i use modelers for my recordings. i said there was a market for it, much like there MIGHT be for this mic. then you said that one should just buy the real amp because modelers blah blah blah.
dipshit. you. also, you suck and your music is retarded. you've been playing guitar your entire life and you still have no concept of what notes go together in a solo.![]()
hmmmmmm ....... can't imagine why you'd need a tube amp for that.
I agree that a tube amp will trump a modeler for very many things but I don't hear one iota of tubey goodness out of those git sounds. I could easily get something similar out of my modelers.
You're welcome to view solos as some formulaic process that's about specific notes needing to go together...whatever works for you.
Again…people are free to use that works for them…but pods/modeling doesn’t work for me.
Yep, I agree with Lt. Bob agreeing with me
Tube amps have one big advantage, a (potentially) gigantic amount of headroom. Can a modeler model headroom? Let's think about that. A guitar signal normally doesn't much exceed 1VRMS (0dBV). That is well within the headroom of a solid state circuit running off of a 9V battery (~8dBV, let's say). OK, so the guitar signal can make it to the ADC and DSP intact--*if* the guitarist has dialed up the correct input gain setting. If the guitarist adds too much gain on the way in and clips the A or the ADC, well I can't help you there.
Then what? OK, the DSP would have to be programmed to respond like the tube amp. That means it has to treat 0dBFS signals as an unusually loud peak, and decide that "normal" signals reside somewhat lower, say -20dBFS. Most importantly, it has to decide how to output the processed signal back to RL; in other words, what is the peak-to-RMS level of the output signal going to be?
If you think about the practical difficulties of getting a simple guitarist to understand that if he really wants "tube-like" sound out of his modeler, he sound be happy with a -20dBFS RMS signal at the output, you'll realize very quickly that you better program a lot of compression at the front end of your modeler. And not surprisingly, a lot of models sound compressed.
Stick a Boss compressor pedal in front of your tube amp, and see if you like it as much.
How does the tube amp guitarist handle the same problem? Compression after the mic amp. The same approach *could* be taken with a model, but you have to be willing to control headroom before that stage (as you must in analogland).
This is why I think it's best to simply record a full-range, uncompressed DI guitar, and either process it straight through at 32 bit float, or reamp if that is your preference. The Pod will always have that disconnect, because it either must output analog or fixed-point digital.
Some might have noticed my little compressor VST treats signals over 0dBFS rather differently than below, and that's on purpose.
whoa ...... great post!
The very thing I dislike about modelers is what seems to me to be a lack of dynamic responsiveness.
I've always found even the good ones to be compressed sounding but I never knew a technical reason why that'd be.
Great explanation.
Yes...it was a great post...and yes, you reafirm what I've been saying about *playing* through amps VS pods and why I don't care for the pods.
Well as Clapton sang, it's in the way that you use it! (dunno about his tone on that track though; I guess it was OK. I recall he was using Strats with active pups in those days though . . . )
If the model has controllable front-end compression, try dialing it back. If its saturation model is variable according to input (let's hope), that should get you most of the way to where you want to go. Makeup the gain you need in the PA.
I haven't played with these things, so I dunno. But I imagine like anything, presets probably need a lot of tweaking . . .
and yes, you reafirm what I've been saying about *playing* through amps VS pods and why I don't care for the pods.