ashcat_lt
Well-known member
Only if you also have the crowd noise, the lights blasting in your face, and a fan to blow back your hair.
JimmyS1969
MOODerator
For some reason I am holding my head in my hand, while I sigh...
Tube amps best for tone and feel. Amp sims for ease of use and diversity. Done.
Tube amps best for tone and feel. Amp sims for ease of use and diversity. Done.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Mmmmmm.....I can cover that.
Already have colored gels in my halogen lights....there's a small fan....and I just need to pull up some crowd cheering and applause sounds.
B
Beck
Guest
Yes! And that's the one you want to record so people think you can fill huge arenas! Don't forget the crowd noise!
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
I just need some spandex, big hair....and maybe platform shoes?
Jay Tee 4303
New member
Sim/pod/Marshall/Fender/Boss/Vox/Rollie/Rockman/Markley, like I sed, whatever I feel like that day.I think he said he uses sims/pods or DI, through the PA system.....
No big hair. Somewhere tween little hair and no hair.
No bong. Sold it w the 412s a thousandcyears ago.
I hear sum folks use the 412s for studio monitors, cuz of the superior design.
Its cas. 20 feet from the wall of dick an it goes silent in the mix.
;-)
Ove Karlsen
New member
A lot of the time, a softclip, with eq before and after, will give a desired sound. It is also really what happens in a guitar amp.
I also have a softclipper with third order distortion, which analog is typically known for. This is also a very psychoacoustic transparent distortion at low levels, so very optimal for softclipping, combining softclip and "analog" sound in one. Google "Ove Karlsen Blog" for the beta.
Peace Be With You.
I also have a softclipper with third order distortion, which analog is typically known for. This is also a very psychoacoustic transparent distortion at low levels, so very optimal for softclipping, combining softclip and "analog" sound in one. Google "Ove Karlsen Blog" for the beta.
Peace Be With You.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Yeah....it happens when you play the big arenas. Need them arrays to make it work.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
ashcat_lt
Well-known member
Honestly, this is my point. All any of these things really are is maybe a couple of non-linear gain stages surrounded by some filters. Analog or digital, that's all they're doing. Yes, complexity... Yes, whatever... Don't get precious about how you get there. If it sounds good, and it works for you, then go.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Yeah...but the way a tube does it, is only possible when using a tube. Everythign else is an attempt to mimic a tube.
Granted, the other options may still appeal to you...so then go with whatever you prefer.
ashcat_lt
Well-known member
An attempt to mimic the way that a tube fails to do what it was originally intended to do. It's a pretty well documented phenomenon, a pretty easy transfer function. Nothing special.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
May be nothing special....but it's only possible with a tube. Everything else is just an approximation....but like I said, that approximation may appeal to some people, so whatever works for you.
G
Greg_L
Banned
No, it's pretty fucking super special. That's why tube technology hasn't changed at all in 100 years, and digital is still scrambling like hell to approximate it.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Here's a nice, straightforward comparison of tubes and transistors.
The Audio Archive, Inc. - Vacuum Tubes versus Solid-State
AFA tubes compared to digital sims....well, a sim is just an equation that was created by someone using some math and their ears to write an algorithm that simulates what the code writer thinks is "that" certain tube sound.
There's NO electronic transfers and what have you...it's just the execution of a math equation.
Again...people may like one over the other, and that's fine....but they are not the same and they don't sound the same.
I get the feeling that some people who use something other than tube amps for their guitar sound... are just bothered by the tube amp guys simply NOT wanting to use that something other than tube amps!
It's like..."Why don't these tube amp fanatics give them up already, and just accept the new digital order"?
I think they would all feel better about their own choices if there were no more tube amps around.
The Audio Archive, Inc. - Vacuum Tubes versus Solid-State
AFA tubes compared to digital sims....well, a sim is just an equation that was created by someone using some math and their ears to write an algorithm that simulates what the code writer thinks is "that" certain tube sound.
There's NO electronic transfers and what have you...it's just the execution of a math equation.
Again...people may like one over the other, and that's fine....but they are not the same and they don't sound the same.
I get the feeling that some people who use something other than tube amps for their guitar sound... are just bothered by the tube amp guys simply NOT wanting to use that something other than tube amps!
It's like..."Why don't these tube amp fanatics give them up already, and just accept the new digital order"?
I think they would all feel better about their own choices if there were no more tube amps around.
G
Greg_L
Banned
Yes, that ^^^^^^^
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
yeppers
c7sus
Disenfranchised Member
From my limited use of teh sims the decay tails don't sound right. Envelope filter decays don't sound even close. The filter cuts out before the tail fades all the way and cuts off the note. My Mutron III doesn't do that, even with the original 30-year-old caps in it. My Moog filters don't do that either.
Analog still sounds better to me.
The tuner works pretty well. Detects the note quicker than my Peterson VS-II.
Analog still sounds better to me.
The tuner works pretty well. Detects the note quicker than my Peterson VS-II.
Ove Karlsen
New member
From my personal research and development of DSP, I would say that digital can sound better than analog, with good algorithms. If digital "is worse" then it is just a bad algorithm. And unfortunately, there are a lot of people who write code, who do not understand what people are looking for in a plugin.
I am both a musician and a developer though. So I did a lot of development that takes into account the musical side.
Regarding "tubes". There seems to be a lot of confusion out there, what really "tubes" are, in what context they are used, and how that makes them sound.
First of all, tubes, the popular ones, say 1950s are not at all hifi. There is a lot of dynamics in them, that makes them saturate, and add tonality/harmonics to the audio. And a lot of the time, they are in a configuration (push/pull etc) that gives 3rd order overtone. So overall, one is looking at some dynamics, and some third order distortion. Third-order distortion gives psychoacoustically less intermodulation distortion, so it can be used to saturate tops of guitar, without getting a typically "distorted" guitar sound. I think this is what a lot of people like about it.
Also in vintage limiters, mics, etc, transistors, there is again the third order overtone, that gets louder as signal approaches clipping.
And then there usually is frequency responses involved, in components or speaker elements etc. Atleast highpassing.
So it really just comes down to eq (dynamics if you want) softclip eq.
Analog is just analog math, with analog imprecisions.
Great to see more people who understand this. The analog debate is sometimes going wildly out of proportions, and poor engineering no doubt has contributed to that, on the digital side. Where lesser engineers measure frequency responses and fail to see the simplicity of the design. And make DSP solutions that have much more complex and cpu-wasting code, that don´t really even hit the target.
And there is a tube-design that has a particular more of a second order sound, for instance, old tube radios. I saw an engineer that converted these to small amps, and said they sounded like tubeamps, and in that context, they really sound different than the third-order configurations. But a look at the design, and what it does, should probably reveal a good DSP approximation. It typically comes down to a shaper, and dynamics, and eq, and this time, maybe more of a second order thing. I don´t know what exactly does that, atm, since I have never really been interested in the sound. If anyone wants the sound, I can actually try to implement a mode in my softclipper though, it should be easy.
Peace Be With You.
I am both a musician and a developer though. So I did a lot of development that takes into account the musical side.
Regarding "tubes". There seems to be a lot of confusion out there, what really "tubes" are, in what context they are used, and how that makes them sound.
First of all, tubes, the popular ones, say 1950s are not at all hifi. There is a lot of dynamics in them, that makes them saturate, and add tonality/harmonics to the audio. And a lot of the time, they are in a configuration (push/pull etc) that gives 3rd order overtone. So overall, one is looking at some dynamics, and some third order distortion. Third-order distortion gives psychoacoustically less intermodulation distortion, so it can be used to saturate tops of guitar, without getting a typically "distorted" guitar sound. I think this is what a lot of people like about it.
Also in vintage limiters, mics, etc, transistors, there is again the third order overtone, that gets louder as signal approaches clipping.
And then there usually is frequency responses involved, in components or speaker elements etc. Atleast highpassing.
So it really just comes down to eq (dynamics if you want) softclip eq.
Analog is just analog math, with analog imprecisions.
Great to see more people who understand this. The analog debate is sometimes going wildly out of proportions, and poor engineering no doubt has contributed to that, on the digital side. Where lesser engineers measure frequency responses and fail to see the simplicity of the design. And make DSP solutions that have much more complex and cpu-wasting code, that don´t really even hit the target.
And there is a tube-design that has a particular more of a second order sound, for instance, old tube radios. I saw an engineer that converted these to small amps, and said they sounded like tubeamps, and in that context, they really sound different than the third-order configurations. But a look at the design, and what it does, should probably reveal a good DSP approximation. It typically comes down to a shaper, and dynamics, and eq, and this time, maybe more of a second order thing. I don´t know what exactly does that, atm, since I have never really been interested in the sound. If anyone wants the sound, I can actually try to implement a mode in my softclipper though, it should be easy.
Peace Be With You.
G
Greg_L
Banned
Or you can just plug into a tube amp and let er rip.