Guitar amp Vs PA?

[mshilarious]

Dude I didn't read all that shit twenty years ago, I'm hardly likely to read it now am I?

Now turn on animated avatars.

No!

I disagree with Cage on many things; improvisation is a biggie. He hated it! But his ideas are like modern music 101, and very applicable to the simplest forms of rock music. I mean he hung out with Lennon, don't think he was on the cover of Sgt. Peppers but Stockhausen was. And we go on pretend like 1967 never happened. I think too many rock musicians are still stuck in 1962, they just don't realize it.

 

[DrewPeterson7]

Ok, since you're gung ho on using a Pod live, I'll give you one cautionary note and then respond specifically to one passage.

First, be VERY careful when you're mixing modelers and real amps, live. If you're the only guitarist in the band or your other guitarist is going direct through a modeler as well, then go right ahead and rock out. However there's two things to keep in mind if you're not doing it this way.

One, the two of you will become very difficult to mix. You will be entirely heard through the mains, whereas your buddy will be amplified by a mix of the mains and the sound of his amp coming off the stage. This means that the relative mix of your two sounds is going to vary hugely depending on where you're standing - in front of him, he'll drown you out, anywhere else, you're drowning him out. This is always an issue when micing guitar amps, but it's even worse when one of you is direct because you'll be that much louder in the mains than him, to ensure a good balance from FOH.

Second, I can't count the number of times I've heard myself or anecdotally been told about two-guitar bands, one with a modeler and the other with a tube amp. Without fail, the guy with the modeler might have been miming his parts on stage for all the good it did him. Two modelers cut equally well and generally two tube amps cut equally well, but for some reason modelers just can't cut through a real amp. I really don't know why this is the case, so I can't even begin to provide you a good reason for this, but pretty much every guitarist I know has made this same observation on their own, that you need to go either all modeler or all real.

...Plus, although they produce a very good sound / tone, they're a one-trick-pony - i.e. that's all they can do. They can not replicate the kind of sound-shifts that a WELL PROGRAMMED (and that's the key!) POD can create for you at the push of a footswitch.

Who wants to watch a guitarist fiddle about with his amp for 10 minutes after every song whilst he attempts (and fails) to dial in the sound for the next song? With a POD, you do all your homework (sound-tests etc.) in the rehearsal studio, and live, you just tap your footswitch and hey-presto! Instant cool sound. So it's infinitely better to use a POD when it comes to versatility..

Ok, this is the one thing that I wanted to comment on.

I still remember the worst show I'd ever seen, it was at this old rail station that had been converted into a (pretty cool, actually) club, that occasionally booked live shows. I was there with a few friends one night, and there was a cover band playing, a guitar-bass-drums trio. All three guys sang, and each would trade off on lead vocals based on who could imitate the original vocalist the best. The guitarist played a Vetta head, and had a patch bank set up for each song, trying to nail the exact tones of the original recording.

Technically, I suppose it was an impressive enough performance, and the band was certainly competent enough. However, it put me to sleep - they might as well have been a CD player. They were a human jukebox, and no more, and nothing of "themselves" came through in their performances, they were just carbon-copying the original. I was bored to tears. The only thing that saved me that night was there were a bunch of russian girls there working as camp councilors somewhere in the area and for some reason they thought I was russian too so they all wanted to talk to me. Which was nice.

I agree with you that user error is the biggest problem with the Pod - not knowing how to dial it in. However, I'll take that a step further, and say there's an added risk - not knowing WHEN to NOT dial it in. You have, what, 60-odd different available amp models on tap in the latest version? Just because you CAN use a million different sounds in a show doesn't mean you necessarily should.

NOTE TO GERG - for your summary, start here.

I've always appreciated bands who put their own spin on things, have a bit of personality, and have a band "sound" so even when they're doing covers, it sounds like the same band. Part of that is performance and talent, but part of that too is going to be the gear they play and the tones they go for. Having the same basic rhythm guitar sound, the same basic clean sound, and the same basic lead sound can go a long way towards providing a sense of coherence to a set - sure, sometimes you might use a different pickup with your rhythm tone, or roll back the volume on your guitar a hair to clean it up a little, and maybe on some solos you want a bit of wah or delay and some you don't, but the fundamental "tonal identity" of the guitarist is always there. With a Pod, you can very easily lose that. I think a band playing covers should aspire to be more than a CD player, and being able to program a different patch bay for each song you play (or, conversely, feeling the need to dial up a different sound from your amp each new song) makes it far too easy to fall into that trap.

So, do you REALLY need a unique, customized guitar sound for every cover you do? Or could you get through your set with a clean channel, rhythm channel, and lead channel, a pedal or two if you need 'em, and just the controls on your amp if you had to? Versatility is nice, but sometimes it's kind of dangerous too.




(I say this as a guy with a pretty kickass four channel tube head, who has absolutely no fucking clue what to do with the 2nd channel. It's nice, it's fun having it there, but I don't NEED it.)

 

[DrewPeterson7]

Let's think about SRV for a minute. Do we realize how old he is (other than being dead, of course)? SRV played stuff that mostly emulated Hendrix, with a little bit of Gibbons-style Texas mixed in. But SRV played a mere ten years after Hendrix. SRV broke THIRTY YEARS AGO!

Um, maybe in the weird, twilight-zone alternate reality you're in. The rest of us have heard of this little known texas guitarist named Albert King.

 

[Lt. Bob]

for some reason modelers just can't cut through a real amp.

It's because they're compressed for lack of a better word.
I don't know if it comes from the A/D conversion or it being all processed in the digital domain, but they don't have the dynamic response of a good tube amp.
With my Mesa's I can bring a solo out in the mix by simply bearing down a bit. It will cover a WIDE dynamic range simply by picking harder or softer.
When I use a modeler thay don't have that same dynamic response. That's why modelers works just fine for recording. You set the sound for what's required for the individual track and usually don't rely so much on just picking harder for instance.
That's also why you simply have to have all the different sounds and volume levels you want programmed in.
I can set my Mesa on a crunch sound and then just bear down and use it for lead work.
With my modelers I have to actually change presets because the crunch/rhythm sound won't really get louder and cut thru just by bearing down on the picking.
So I have to have a preset set up for every little different sound I desire.

 

[muttley600]

No!

I disagree with Cage on many things; improvisation is a biggie. He hated it! But his ideas are like modern music 101, and very applicable to the simplest forms of rock music. I mean he hung out with Lennon, don't think he was on the cover of Sgt. Peppers but Stockhausen was. And we go on pretend like 1967 never happened. I think too many rock musicians are still stuck in 1962, they just don't realize it.

Like I said I didn't read all that shit then. I'm not about to now. Also I think I'm in a group of one when I wish Lennon was still alive. That way we could all have worked out what an annoyingly pretentious dick he was and only ever a product of his day.

Now get to work fixing the animated avatar thing. Make yourself useful.

 

[mshilarious]

You know whom I like better than Albert King? Albert Collins. There was a dude with the stones to play the same note for a 12-bar solo. He probably had no idea who John Cage was. You do, yet you're afraid to do the same thing. You can play five notes, or seven notes, but not one note, and not twelve notes. The dude would walk out the door with his ax and play in the street! That's performance art right there . . .

 

[muttley600]

You know whom I like better than Albert King? Albert Collins. There was a dude with the stones to play the same note for a 12-bar solo. He probably had no idea who John Cage was. You do, yet you're afraid to do the same thing. You can play five notes, or seven notes, but not one note, and not twelve notes. The dude would walk out the door with his ax and play in the street! That's performance art right there . . .

The moment you play that one note you've plagiarised some one now fix the avatar problem.

 

[darrin_h2000]

I do have experience with it. Modellers suck live.

But you are a drummer...lol...Id agree if you said my roland kit wasnt the same as real drums...and you would be right.

Now the line 6 stuff especially with the 300 patches to sound like all those classic tunes dont sound 100% there either.

But Im not playing live just to impress a bunch of guys in a thread on the internet...and you would be surprised to see how good it actually sounds.

Now making that blanket statement means that any group that is presently doing this sucks live...a good example of one would be Rush...everybody knows Geddy Lee runs his bass through a Sansamp...do they suck live?

 

[mshilarious]

The moment you play that one note you've plagiarised some one now fix the avatar problem.

First, I don't care about your problem, because I don't mind static avatars. Second, I have avatars disabled. Third, I am not a moderator, I am a malefactor. Fourth, even if I were a moderator, that still wouldn't make me an admin.

Fifth, maybe a Pod will suck onstage. But maybe it will enable a type of sound we haven't heard before. Maybe that sound will suck, but maybe it won't. Impulse responses are not unlike any other form of synthesis. We haven't used synthesis too creatively; mostly we have tried to simply recreate sounds that we've already heard. I sincerely hope we can do better with a technique like IR.

I think we've forgotten why electric guitar is such an exciting instrument. It's because the electronic techniques used with the guitar created new and unique sonic textures like no other instrument before. In the '60s and somewhat the '70s, these palettes generated a large amount of creativity.

But now, contrary to the spirit of those times, we instead have become slaves to those techniques rather than being inspired by the spirit that lead to their creation. When I said I didn't want a guitar to think it was president, that really means that I (really Cage) want each sound to be a sound. I don't want a transistor to be a tube, I want it to be a transistor. I don't want an impulse response to be a speaker, I want it to be an impulse response.

Once we explore the possibilities of any device beyond it ability to mimic another device, then we can discover what the potential of that device truly is. Just like a guitar amplifier onstage has a certain potential, so does no guitar amplifier onstage. Let's assume the sound reinforcement system is competent and so is the sound technician. Now these become artistic possibilities rather than limitations.

There is a thread on another board talking about massive edits as a means to an end. That in and of itself is not troubling; it is little different than what musique concrete did in the '50s. The problem is when the technique is solely used in service of an illusion of something that could be real. That mandates the technique only serve that goal, which is really a very limited manner of thinking. It says, "in order to create this music you must follow this strict technique."

We need to cast aside such preconceived notions of music and technique, because they have prevented musical progress for forty years now. In my entire lifetime, music has progressed less than it did for any four year period in the '50s or '60s.

 

[darrin_h2000]

We need to cast aside such preconceived notions of music and technique, because they have prevented musical progress for forty years now. In my entire lifetime, music has progressed less than it did for any four year period in the '50s or '60s.

So you are saying that anyone here in this thread that doesnt like modeling is holding music back in general.
...on the bright side they are all old farts and will be dead soon.

 

[muttley600]

First, I don't care about your problem, because I don't mind static avatars. Second, I have avatars disabled. Third, I am not a moderator, I am a malefactor. Fourth, even if I were a moderator, that still wouldn't make me an admin.

Fifth, maybe a Pod will suck onstage. But maybe it will enable a type of sound we haven't heard before. Maybe that sound will suck, but maybe it won't. Impulse responses are not unlike any other form of synthesis. We haven't used synthesis too creatively; mostly we have tried to simply recreate sounds that we've already heard. I sincerely hope we can do better with a technique like IR.

I think we've forgotten why electric guitar is such an exciting instrument. It's because the electronic techniques used with the guitar created new and unique sonic textures like no other instrument before. In the '60s and somewhat the '70s, these palettes generated a large amount of creativity.

But now, contrary to the spirit of those times, we instead have become slaves to those techniques rather than being inspired by the spirit that lead to their creation. When I said I didn't want a guitar to think it was president, that really means that I (really Cage) want each sound to be a sound. I don't want a transistor to be a tube, I want it to be a transistor. I don't want an impulse response to be a speaker, I want it to be an impulse response.

Once we explore the possibilities of any device beyond it ability to mimic another device, then we can discover what the potential of that device truly is. Just like a guitar amplifier onstage has a certain potential, so does no guitar amplifier onstage. Let's assume the sound reinforcement system is competent and so is the sound technician. Now these become artistic possibilities rather than limitations.

There is a thread on another board talking about massive edits as a means to an end. That in and of itself is not troubling; it is little different than what musique concrete did in the '50s. The problem is when the technique is solely used in service of an illusion of something that could be real. That mandates the technique only serve that goal, which is really a very limited manner of thinking. It says, "in order to create this music you must follow this strict technique."

We need to cast aside such preconceived notions of music and technique, because they have prevented musical progress for forty years now. In my entire lifetime, music has progressed less than it did for any four year period in the '50s or '60s.

Summary.

No wait if it's anything like the rest of your posts recently don't bother.

 

[Roguetitan]

I recerntly mixed a band where the bass player didn't bring an amp. He just had some kind of amp simulator (I didn't make a note of what it was) and went straight from its DI output into the desk (via snake). Sounded great!

Probably a Sansamp bass driver DI
or could have been a Behringer Bass V-Amp Pro
both excellent pieces of equipment for going Directly into the mixer.

but ya a good simulator can and will work DI if you are not a sound snob.
the big reason most people say that modelers suck is because all the stage dynamics are gone except what is coming through the monitors
the audience is going to hear through the mains what the performer cant.

 

[mshilarious]

So you are saying that anyone here in this thread that doesnt like modeling is holding music back in general.
...on the bright side they are all old farts and will be dead soon.

Not modeling. In fact modeling is part of the problem: putting certain sounds on a pedestal. Tube amp devotees are correct: models aren't exactly like the real thing. Lt. Bob (I think it was) complains about dynamic response; I suspect that is a lack of rigor in DSP coding, or a lack of DSP resources, or both.

But that's not the point, the point is the tools that enable modeling are being used not for new and exciting sounds, but to try to recreate old sounds more cheaply.

If the DSP techniques used in modeling were avaiable in 1967, they wouldn't have been used to model tube amps, because tube amps still would have been required for amplification anyway. There would be nothing to emulate.

No, they would have been use to create totally new sounds. Guitarists now should be thinking about how to create their own new and unique impulse responses, and then finding interesting and musical methods of using those reponses to modulate the sound of their guitar. And that in turn might create an entirely new music.

 

[muttley600]

But you are a drummer...lol...Id agree if you said my roland kit wasnt the same as real drums...and you would be right.

But you are a cock...lol...Id agree if you said a dildo wasnt the same as real cock........

Now making that blanket statement means that any group that is presently doing this sucks live...a good example of one would be Rush...everybody knows Geddy Lee runs his bass through a Sansamp...do they suck live?

Yep one of the most boring bands I've ever seen live. Might just as well have stayed home and listened to the album while looking at the cd/lp cover from across the hall. Possibly the most over rated band of all time. Bad example.

 

[Roguetitan]

and you are the douchebag
and you proved it by saying RUSH sucks live

 

[WhiteStrat]

...a good example of one would be Rush...everybody knows Geddy Lee runs his bass through a Sansamp...do they suck live?

Not a good example. A bad one, in fact. If it's true (since EVERYBODY knows, it must be!) that Geddy Lee runs through a Sansamp, that's not at all germaine to the discussion. A Sansamp is at best a tonestack and a bit of speaker sim. That may be "modelling" in the purest sense of the word, but it's not at all comparable to running your guitar through a POD to the PA.

I know. I have a POD, and a sansamp. I've used them both that way. A sansamp doesn't extinguish the dynamics of the instrument like a POD does.

 

[muttley600]

and you are the douchebag
and you proved it by saying RUSH sucks live

Can't help it, they always bored the pants off of me. Seen them in their early days and more recently and I still don't get it.

You're not such a douche as you used to be though so well done on that one.

 

[Greg_L]

But you are a drummer...lol...Id agree if you said my roland kit wasnt the same as real drums...and you would be right.

Now the line 6 stuff especially with the 300 patches to sound like all those classic tunes dont sound 100% there either.

But Im not playing live just to impress a bunch of guys in a thread on the internet...and you would be surprised to see how good it actually sounds.

Now making that blanket statement means that any group that is presently doing this sucks live...a good example of one would be Rush...everybody knows Geddy Lee runs his bass through a Sansamp...do they suck live?

I'm a drummer that can also rock guitars and bass and plays live all the time with a band full of pro equipment. I also go see tons of live music. Maybe your brand of low volume shitstained geezer music can get by using modellers live. More power to ya. Your audience is half dead anyway. But to suggest, even for the sake of playing devils advocate, that a modeller is better than a tube amp is asinine. Surely even you're not that stupid. The Rush comparison is also dumb and irrelevant. They're fucking elite. They have the absolute best of everything and play ginormous venues. They're not some shmoe playing in a nearly empty bar on a wednesday night. Angus Young's amp isn't onstage either. It doesn't need to be when you're playing a 20,000 seat arena.

 

[DrewPeterson7]

Not a good example. A bad one, in fact. If it's true (since EVERYBODY knows, it must be!) that Geddy Lee runs through a Sansamp, that's not at all germaine to the discussion. A Sansamp is at best a tonestack and a bit of speaker sim. That may be "modelling" in the purest sense of the word, but it's not at all comparable to running your guitar through a POD to the PA.

I know. I have a POD, and a sansamp. I've used them both that way. A sansamp doesn't extinguish the dynamics of the instrument like a POD does.

Yeah, even I record my bass through a Sansamp pre, because the thing fucking rules. But, calling a "modeler" kind of misses the point - it may be designed to sound like a number of other amps, but it's a pure analog signal, no AD/DA conversion.

Furthermore, that's kind of a moot point because, unlike electric guitar, "direct" recorded bass is actually pretty accepted in rock music. It's part of the sound of a bass in the way that (barring a VERY few applications, mostly for pristine clean work) direct guitar isn't. That's sort of like justifying recording distorted vocals by pointing to an Ibanez Tube Screamer.

 

[miroslav]

So, the main thing about valve amps is that they sound good, but are otherwise just huge heavy boxes that, from time to time, do go wrong and require fixing, or servicing once a year at least to maintain optimum performance. Plus, although they produce a very good sound / tone, they're a one-trick-pony - i.e. that's all they can do. They can not replicate the kind of sound-shifts that a WELL PROGRAMMED (and that's the key!) POD can create for you at the push of a footswitch.

Judging by that very long post you made, you're trying very hard to talk yourself out of using and amp and to go with a POD instead...but that's purely a convenience issue. All the negative stuff you said above is mostly not true.

1.) Not all tube amps are "huge heavy boxes".
I have three tube amps that a child could probably lift without too much trouble. Also, if you go the Head + Cab route instead of Combo...you can even get bigger amps and STILL not have the "huge heavy boxes" because you break up the weight and size into two pieces.

2.) I've had tube amps for years and years...and never a single issue, and some of those tube amps were DROPPED a few times going to/from gigs.
I have NO idea why some guys feel the need to have their amps constantly serviced or to be swapping out tubes every few months...?
I think they do that because they don't know any better.

3.) I can get dozens of tones from a single-channel amp...and with a two-channel amp, that much more. Add one or two decent analog pedals for OD or time-based FX, and what the heck else do you need???
Just consider how many great guitarists have one signature tone.

What mshilarious is saying below, is something to consider.

Guitarists now should be thinking about how to create their own new and unique impulse responses, and then finding interesting and musical methods of using those reponses to modulate the sound of their guitar. And that in turn might create an entirely new music.

But I would add, instead of using modelers to emulate "real tube amps", just use a real amp!
Personally, I don't think modelers will do much to help guitarists come up with "entirely new music"...but his comments certainly point out the irony of using modelers when the real thing is available.
Hey...if it's purely convenience that is driving your thoughts, then the modeler will win out, but it won't win on any other fronts, good tones being the most important one...IMO.

And another thing....
Why do people need to use modeling to cop tones that someone else created?
Use a real amp and develop your own tone, and you won't need 128 presets to pick from....you'll find 3-4 variations that are yours, and for that, all you need is a decent amp that suits your style....but you have to first find your style.
It's not going to be inside any modeler.