Analogue Recording VS In box Vst guitar modeling

B

Broken_Hal0

New member
Hello everyone , just thought I would get peoples advice about the advantages and of course disadvantages to recording guitar in the box or the more traditional way.

First off , my main amp for recording is a Jsx 2x12 combo so I am not worried about the quality of the amp. I have 2 rode K2 , a 4033 and a plethora of 57's and other mics so m/s stereo recording is not an issue. But in terms of instant gratification (recording that amp in a few takes and having the tracks come out sounding great) does not happen often . So I look at options such as amplitube , guitar rig , gtr and so on. I use my pod xt live for lots of my tracks and sometimes the jsx never gets used.

Is there an advantage to all of this? Most of us being our own producers and engineers we are the most critical on ourselves and I find that I feel like I cheated when I reach to such tools as those "in the box methods" . Tracking guitars , to me at least , is my hardest task of all in the studio. The immense number of options within those vst always has me second guessing whether I chose the "right" sound.

In the end I know that if it sounds good then go with it but do you guys have any words of wisdom to put my worries to ease? The big question is ;

Are any of these vst modeling apps capable of producing quality sound that will compete with the overall tone such as those of a JSX? Is it something to use to taste or is it something I should completely avoid and spend more time mastering the art of mic'ing my amp the old fashioned way??


Thanks for your info!
Neil S
The Trinity Project
The Little Studio
 
You haven't really stated you exact problem...like what exactly do you not like about using your amp...what is it about the final tracks that sucks...etc?

AFA the "instant gratification"...I'm not sure why that's an issue?
Why does it need to be instant?
Sometimes you need to work the situation until you get the tones you want...and then remember that setup for the future, ans then it too will be "instant". ;)


Not trying to sound snobby...but I find guitar tracks to be the easiest to track. Most times I just "toss" a mic out in front of the amp about 1.5' - 2' back...and that's it. I often build a "tent" over the amp/cab/mic so as not to get any of the room in the track...but sometimes I don't.
Lately I've using a Cascade Fat Head II ribbon mic for most of my guitar tracking...though there are many other mics that will work well (dynamic & condensor).

For me...the main setup happens BEFORE I ever put the mic out or hit record.

I don't ever use pods/sims....it's always a real amp/cab.
 
This is slowly taking over the loudness wars for issue du jour!

I agree the modelling has become amazing. Die hards swear by the 2x 12 with mic, but for a lot of us, that's just not practical.

I am perfectly happy with ITB, biggest problem I had was cpu power and that is quickly becoming a non-issue as well. I settled for the best of both and went with a Roland vg-99. It doesn't use cpu, but it is really a glorified dedicated microchip powered computer modeller. But, I get to turn knobs!
 
For me it's less about the sound of the amp sims and more about the reasoning behind it. You have access to a nice amp and plenty of nice mics. YOu have the ingredients to make a good recording. What's holding you back? If I had access to drums and a place to record them, I would do it. But I don't, so I have to use a drum machine. But I work hard to to program it well, to find creative ways to record the sounds. If I could record real drums, I wouldn't use a drum machine unless I wanted a specific sound from it. Every chance you get to put a microphone in front of a source, I BELIEVE, you should do it. You will learn more. Giving yourself unlimited options kills creativity. My personal opinion is that you should buckle down and start tracking your guitar and amp. Just my $.02
 
Broken_Hal0 said:
Are any of these vst modeling apps capable of producing quality sound that will compete with the overall tone such as those of a JSX? Is it something to use to taste or is it something I should completely avoid and spend more time mastering the art of mic'ing my amp the old fashioned way??
Click to expand...

You shouldn't "completely avoid" anything. You do what gives you the best sound and that's that. Be aware that "best sound" means best for the song, not the best guitar sound in a vacuum. Sometimes the best sound is jarringly bad. :D

Most of the time for most songs and most producers, the best sound means micing an amp. For those times when a sim fits best, go for it with a clear conscience. Hell, this weekend I took a guy's guitar out of his amp, plugged it straight into a cheap Mackie desk mixer, cranked the preamp trim to clip the hell out of it, and recorded that. No sims or distortion circuits or pedals or nothin'. Nobody (including me) is ever going to recommend that as a viable way to track a distorted guitar. But at the same time there is no rule that says you can't.

Long story short: Feel no guilt in using modeling apps, but be aware that you will not use them all that often if you have a good amp.
 
clayfeet said:
Giving yourself unlimited options kills creativity. - That's so true!
Click to expand...

Yep, totally agree; reduce the variables man.

Broken_Hal0, for your amp/mic vs POD XT, I think Chibi Nappa has it right. Use what you need, when you need, to get the result you want.

I'm all for time saving and to lay backing tracks using the POD XT is a big time saver, and flexible as well if you want to tweak the type of sound.

For me, If the guitar tone suits the XT (ie if it's the type of sound that will sound "real" when you use the XT to record) and it's not up front in the mix, then I use it.

For guitar parts that are up front in the mix and on display - if I'm worried that the dark hooded real-guitar-sound enforcers of the world will hear my production, hunt me down and hang me from my testacles, then I mic up the amp.

I find that the XT just won't do a good clean/slight break up valve sound. I've tried heaps, but just can't do it. I have to use an amp here. For anything more distorted up to a point, I think you can have quite a few people guessing whether or not you pushed air or not.

Hope this helps.

Cheers,
FM
 
Real amps vs. VST's I will always go for the 6505+ through a mesa if I can get my hands on it, but considering I cant afford either I use VST's. In my experience the VST's that are the best are actually the free ones. Amplitube, Guitar Rig, Revalver, GTR, and so on all fall short of the stuff that is freely available (I.E. AcmeBar Gig, Nick Crow, LePou, ect.), Not to mention the ones I can't even name. Especially when it comes to cabinets where Impulse Responses reign king. The pay for stuff falls WAY short. Hell $15 get's you Recabinet Complete, and you end up with some where near 2000 IR's. You don't get anything near that with the pay-for stuff with the exception of Revalver.

Over all though when your talking about the differences between Real amps, and VST's I think it's to easy to do what most expect at first which is "Oh, so I buy this $300 software, install it, and that's it! I'll never need an amp, or mic again!" When that is just not the case, all you did was buy a Lego set with no instructions. Hand's down the easiest way is to mic an amp. Getting a real tone, or the feeling of a cabinet pushing Air with software is quite a challenge, and it does take a lot of work, complicated routings, and being creative with plug-ins, compression, and EQ.

I don't think the software kills the creativity per-say. More so the approach most vendors take to building that software I think is what kills the creativity. Not to mention to get a good balanced tone you end up fighting that VST through the mixing process.

Preset's are not a good thing, and that I think kills the Creativity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top