I Gotta warm up that guitar tone...

[rvdsm]

To delve even further, there is a world of difference between a tube amp at full volume and one at super low volume.

An all-tube amp can even sound cold and solid-state like if not driven to the point where the power tubes begin to break up. That's why techs can adjust the bias and plate voltage to your liking so if you want early breakup (so you don't have to rattle the windows to get the desired sound) they can acheive that.

If you can find a unit that can faithfully and accurately duplicate an old fender or hiwatt running balls to the wall, then you have solid gold in your hand.

 

[Kevzmusic]

I certainly use my POD on tracks all the time, and there is no way anybody can tell the difference when the tracks are in a mix.
I think the same thing will eventually happen for live rigs too.
Aaron

Aaron,

You do tend to give a 'mixed' message here

First, in your initial post you said, the only way to get a TUBE sound is with a real amp, mic'ed up.........

Then (shown above) you say that you use your POD on tracks all the time, and that there is NO WAY anybody can tell the difference in the mix.........

Doesn't your last statement kinda make the first one - null n void...IF nobody can "tell the difference" in the MIX, then who cares HOW, or what gear was used to actualy record the track...and, therefore that makes the modeller equally as good for 'recording' purposes as a real amp....

Now, of course for playing live that's another story, but then again, one can always stick a 'real amp' infront of the modeller to add warmth & uummmph, and just use it for the variety of sounds and abundant FX, etc.

Right?

KEV

 

[Aaron Cheney]

Aaron,

You do tend to give a 'mixed' message here

Yes, I am. I've said from the beginning that I could be fooled in a blind listening test and that modeling is purt' near there. I think the problem is that you're still trying to pigeon-hole me as being a close-minded "tube merchant". It just won't work, because I don't take an extremist stance in either direction. I would use either one, or forsake both for some third option in a heartbeat if the situation called for it.

First, in your initial post you said, the only way to get a TUBE sound is with a real amp, mic'ed up.........

True. And the only way to get the sound of a real duck call is to record a real duck. Sure... you could use one of them imitation "duck-call modelers" that they have, but it wouldn't sound exactly like a real duck.

Then (shown above) you say that you use your POD on tracks all the time, and that there is NO WAY anybody can tell the difference in the mix.........

In a mix, you could probably fool just about anybody into thinking your "duck call modeler" was a real duck though. Because see the thing is: in a mix, where there are lots of other things competeing for freq's and space, an accurate reproduction is not usually what you need. You need a sound that will fit into the mix a fulfill a purpose. In such a scenario, a "duck call modeler" is a close enough representation to fool most people. Furthermore, in a pop music mix, most people wouldn't be expecting a real duck anyway, because real duck sounds are generally reserved for more natural sounding music, like folk or bluegrass, whereas pop music generally only uses heavily processed duck sounds that are hardly recognizable as a duck anyway.

Doesn't your last statement kinda make the first one - null n void...IF nobody can "tell the difference" in the MIX, then who cares HOW, or what gear was used to actualy record the track...and, therefore that makes the modeller equally as good for 'recording' purposes as a real amp....
Right?
KEV

Exactly! What you use makes absolutely no difference as long as it is achieving the results you need.
You're trying to change my repsonses to answer a different question than the one you originally asked. The original question wasn't "Does it matter whether I use a POD or not?", but rather "How can I make my POD sound more like a real tube amp?". Apparently you were hearing a difference, and you were ready to spend $800 to fix it.
My answer was simply "You're approaching it from the wrong angle. If you want a more "tube" sound, why not use a tube amp?" Why don't you just give it a try? Or are you one o' them "modeling merchants"?


got mojo?
www.voodoovibe.com

p.s. Where is the sign-up sheet for the HR debate team? Me and Kev want on.

 

[GONZO-X]

i've been using a pod XT for about 6 months now

after using a mesa boogie since 1981........

i've got some insights....

first of all, it's got some great sounds.

and that really is enough.

on the other hand, when i plug the xt into my boogie (via the return effects, using the boogie only as a power amp) it always sounds better....

and it's because i get this 3D effect......
the room comes into play, and the physical effect of the sound coming off the speaker, and pushing air.

this, to me, is the Voo-Doo and the MoJo of rock and roll.....
a tube amp working....


and as much as i dig working with my XT, this is something that they will never model.

 

[Kevzmusic]

I think the problem is that you're still trying to pigeon-hole me as being a close-minded "tube merchant". It just won't work.

Aaron,

Nah,

I'm not consciously trying to do that.....it just may come across like that. I'm just being nitpicky, that's just my analytical nature

I guess I shoulda re-phrased my original question here to read:

"How can I add some warmth/richness to my XTPRO modeller tone?" Instead of how can I make it sound more like a tube amp.

I probably would have gotten (is that a real word?) a more varied response.

I rented an ART Tubre pre from my local music gear shop today....Hooked it up to th XTPRO (via SPDIF) and ran the Line6 into my OMNI/Delta & monitors as usual...

After switching back n forth for about an hour, I can honestly say the ART Tub pre makes absolutely NO difference to the warmth of the XTPRO tone at all......However, what it does do....is produce a 'slightly' cleaner signal (for whatever reason).....that is a tad more pleasing....but it's so minescule, that I only notice it, probably coz I'm looking for it....

So, you were right, it's makes NO real improvement, although, of course the ART unit is a very cheapo bit of kit.

I am going to get a decent EQ rack unit for live work tho, can you suggest something that has both a 31 band graphic and 7 band para EQ.....

Not Behringer please!!!

I wish I could find a unit that I could "edit" via PC software, coz my vision (triplopia) is not that great, so I find 'tweaking' with small LED display screens rather awkward and tiring

Over....

KEV

 

[acorec]

Quote:"You're coming at the problem from the wrong direction. If you want to get rid of the "sterile" edge of digital modeling and replace it with that "tube kinda warmth/richness", why would you want to use digital modelers as the starting point for your tone??? You're just throwing good after bad.

Mic a real amp. It's the only way.

Modelers have come a long way to be sure. The problem with them is they make everybody's tone sound the same. If you want real tube warmth; if you want something that doesn't sound canned; if you want something that doesn't sound like everyone else... you have to take the time to mic a real amp.

Yeah, it's a lot more trouble, and there are all kinds of variables like mic position, and room sound, and humidity, and blah, blah, blah... but tackling those variables is what gives your recording character and individuality."

No pain...no gain.

got mojo?
www.voodoovibe.com




I agree and disagree. I know what you are saying. The problem with modellers is that you get so used to the sound, that the sound of the modeller is all you hear. You get totally desensatised to the nuances and playing styles. I will give an example: I use modelleing stuff all the time because I am in a hurry and have no time to setup the amp and mic. The more I use the modeller, the more dissatisfied I become with the sound.It gets so bad that I can hear only the sound of the modeller and it starts to grate on my nerves. Now, I have also found that listening to my own recordings over the years (many), I know I used one of the many modellers/effect boxes I have. The problem is, after so much time not hearing them, I have no idea which ones I used for which songs. I hear alot of my older songs and think "damn, that guitar sounds really good, how did I do that?"

I never get this way with an amp and mic. Once I get THE sound, I am happy with it for the most part. I do know which songs I used the amp and mic (real, formal studio records).

It is funny but true (for me).

 

[Kevzmusic]

I agree and disagree. I know what you are saying. The problem with modellers is that you get so used to the sound, that the sound of the modeller is all you hear. You get totally desensatised to the nuances and playing styles. I will give an example: I use modelleing stuff all the time because I am in a hurry and have no time to setup the amp and mic. The more I use the modeller, the more dissatisfied I become with the sound.It gets so bad that I can hear only the sound of the modeller and it starts to grate on my nerves. Now, I have also found that listening to my own recordings over the years (many), I know I used one of the many modellers/effect boxes I have. The problem is, after so much time not hearing them, I have no idea which ones I used for which songs. I hear alot of my older songs and think "damn, that guitar sounds really good, how did I do that?"

I never get this way with an amp and mic. Once I get THE sound, I am happy with it for the most part. I do know which songs I used the amp and mic (real, formal studio records).

It is funny but true (for me).

Yo Acorec,

Your comment here really doesn't make much sense to me....

It seems to have more to do with organizing yourself, than anything to do with using a modeller...or not.

I only use 5-6 different tones on my Line6 XTPRO....and simply create patches via the software which are stored/loaded into the editor.....

Each time I create a tune, all I have to do is make a written note of which PATCH was used for the rhythm tracks n leads, etc - very simple.

IF I was using a real amp & mic'ing up, etc....I 'd still have to make notes of various settings used, so, I can't see anything different there.

Whether one is using a modeller, or real amp/cab to record......ya just keep your "signature sound/s" and go with them....same as you would if using a real amp.

In fact, storing patches via the modelling PC software is the easiest way I have ever saved FX/Tone settings, etc...

KEV

 

[acorec]

Miking an amp can never. ever be duplicated exactly. Even if you leave everything exactly as the day before, a simple thing like the weather affects the sound. There are so many variables that contribute to the sound. Modellers sound the same as they are stored programs. Modellers have their own sound independant of the player. All of the modellers have no punch, no clarity (for dirty guitars) and no excitement. I own tons of these things and just give up on buying any more. I only use them when I am in a hurry. MIking an amp is the only way to seriously record guitar.

 

[Kevzmusic]

Miking an amp can never. ever be duplicated exactly. Even if you leave everything exactly as the day before, a simple thing like the weather affects the sound. There are so many variables that contribute to the sound. Modellers sound the same as they are stored programs. Modellers have their own sound independant of the player. All of the modellers have no punch, no clarity (for dirty guitars) and no excitement. I own tons of these things and just give up on buying any more. I only use them when I am in a hurry. MIking an amp is the only way to seriously record guitar.

I think you haven't tried the new XTPRO modeller.......

YES, I agree, the old POD 2.3 series was a tad 'muddy' especially for rhythm tracks......this was always a bummer, coz it could be heard, even within a full mix...

However, the new XT series modellers from Line6 have great "clarity"....one can 'tweak' the sucker via the software editor so much, that it's possible to obtain any kind of sound...

As YOU say,

Miking an amp can never. ever be duplicated exactly. Even if you leave everything exactly as the day before....

This to me, with regard to recording....is a 'negative' thing....

As a musician, I WANT "my sound" to be 100% consistant.....on my tunes.....(not that I want it to sound like anyone else).....but I do want my signature guitar tone the same all the time, unless I choose to change it - of course.

KEV

 

[pennylink]

OK, so there are plenty of opinions about tube vs. modelling amp. Bottom line: I haven't seen even ONE suggestion here on how to make the modeller sound warmer or more tube-like. Could it be that modellers just don't have that ability?

That's why a lot of people feel so strong about tube amps. At this point in time it's the only way to get that genuine warm, fat tube sound.

Of course there will be technological improvements as time goes by, and at some point in the maybe not so distant future all tube amps will end up in dumpsters. However, in the meantime... OK I've made my point.

Peace.

 

[mrface2112]

modellers can produce some great sounds. and some amps record poorly. if i had a choice, i would far prefer to stick a mic in front of a small 5-15W tube amp with a single 10 or 12, than a 100W solidstate Marshall with a 4x12. the marshall was intended to compete with a drummer and to carry a live room with sheer amounts of volume--not to excite your ears with creamy tone and complex overtones. much like mic selection being key, i would argue that a 100W Marshall (especially a solidstate one) with a 4x12 cab is prolly the wrong tool for the job when you want to record an amp. maybe that's why you're so displeased with micing it? could also be the amount of gain/distortion you're using through the amp. most solidstate distortions (and i've never been fond of marshall valvestate distortion) have always sounded "thin" to me, and a little distortion goes a LONG way when recording an amp. it's real easy to thin out a track with too much distortion.


however, what y'all are really missing is the organic interaction that micing a real amp gives a track. there's an interaction between the strings, the pickups, the input, the tubes, the transformer, the speaker, the air, and the way the sound hits the mic that can not (yet) be duplicated with a modeler.

couple that with a screaming tube amp (even a small one can get pretty damn loud) and the way that a loud amp interacts with the guitar itself (and the strings and pickups, etc). the amp vibrates the wood on the guitar, and literally shakes it alive by moving the wood fibers. you don't get this organic reaction with a modeler, unless you crank your control room monitors or something while you're playing.

that's the one thing, IMO, that modelers lack--the physical interaction between sound, electricity, air and wood. and that imparts a lot more tone than people realise. that's part of the reason there's no substitute for a mic'd amp. modelers put out some good sound, but call me old fashioned or neophobic, i'll take an amp and a mic any day.


wade

 

[Aaron Cheney]

however, what y'all are really missing is the organic interaction that micing a real amp gives a track. there's an interaction between the strings, the pickups, the input, the tubes, the transformer, the speaker, the air, and the way the sound hits the mic that can not (yet) be duplicated with a modeler.

couple that with a screaming tube amp (even a small one can get pretty damn loud) and the way that a loud amp interacts with the guitar itself (and the strings and pickups, etc). the amp vibrates the wood on the guitar, and literally shakes it alive by moving the wood fibers. you don't get this organic reaction with a modeler, unless you crank your control room monitors or something while you're playing.

wade

Yes.



Aaron.

 

[Kevzmusic]

there's an interaction between the strings, the pickups, the input, the tubes, the transformer, the speaker, the air, and the way the sound hits the mic that can not (yet) be duplicated with a modeler.


Well, the strings and pickups part of the equation apply just the same using a modeller too, as does individual finger technique, playing style, feel, etc.

I already said in an earlier post (in this thread) that I admit, the speaker/AIR component is missing with a modeller, that I agree, and probably will be the biggest challenge for Line6, etc...to duplicate...

Aaron has agreed with me here that, within a MIX, it's almost impossible to tell the difference between a track recorded with a modeller and one done with a real tube amp..(and so do many others that I talk to)...but, I still run into guys like Chessrock (over in the rack-tube pre amp post) that insist they can always tell whether it's a tube amp or not.

I'm fast believeing that the 'old skool' stigma is alive n well.......Ie: folks who grew up using tube amps are finding it really hard to accept that very shortly tube amps just won't be around!

Except in a museum - of course

KEV

 

[Aaron Cheney]

Guitarists are very slow to accept new ideas. Kyeboardists look for something new every week it seems. Even bassists are willing to go along w/ something new without much of a fight.

I think it's the mechanical nature of the instrument that appeals to us. You can wrap your brain around it: how a tremolo bar works, how tuners work, how a pickup works, how a speaker works. You can see every physical component layed out and wired together, and understand their purposes. You can look under the hood and see each pot and capacitor. You can take a guitar or amp apart and figure out it's functions, and then replace the fuse or the pickup or the tube and your back in busisness. You can repair your gear with a new part and a screwdriver. And because you can repair it, you have it for a long time. The worn spots on it are from every gig you played with it. The broken knobs are from you. It eventually gets yellow, and all the wood settles, and the vinyl gets ripped, and the fretboard wears in, and the paint comes off. Your sweat gets in it. You carry your heart around in it. It comes to represent you and you get attached to it.

With a modeler you get no such visceral reaction. It's a cold, calculating computer, and if it breaks down you have to buy another one 'cause they're disposable, and they've gotten twice as cheap since you bought yours 3 years ago.

People 20 years and younger have lived in a disposable world their whole lives, where every year every electronic product is better and cheaper than the year before. They almost expect it, and just assume it's the way things are. I admit that I love it too, as it's given me opportunities I never would have had otherwise.

But the romantic part of me still wants tubes, and I do think they sound and play better than any other alternative. I plan on owning my amp for the rest of my days, but I don't have the same expectation or affection for my POD. I look at it as a tool that I'll be replacing/updating every once in a while, so why get attached?


got mojo?
www.voodoovibe.com

 

[Sonixx]

however, what y'all are really missing is the organic interaction that micing a real amp gives a track. there's an interaction between the strings, the pickups, the input, the tubes, the transformer, the speaker, the air, and the way the sound hits the mic that can not (yet) be duplicated with a modeler.

couple that with a screaming tube amp (even a small one can get pretty damn loud) and the way that a loud amp interacts with the guitar itself (and the strings and pickups, etc). the amp vibrates the wood on the guitar, and literally shakes it alive by moving the wood fibers. you don't get this organic reaction with a modeler, unless you crank your control room monitors or something while you're playing.

that's the one thing, IMO, that modelers lack--the physical interaction between sound, electricity, air and wood. and that imparts a lot more tone than people realise. that's part of the reason there's no substitute for a mic'd amp. modelers put out some good sound, but call me old fashioned or neophobic, i'll take an amp and a mic any day.


wade

this easily corrected... take a small amp, can be (should be) low power, and sit the speaker next to and aim it at the guitar body. better yet, put a volume pedal between the modeler and the small amp, and you can decided when you want the feedback. about ten minutes of set up time. almost the best of both worlds. modeler tone and real feedback. this can make significant difference.

 

[mrface2112]

IMO, it has little to do with feedback, at least, for me. it's more that the volume from the speaker interacts with fibers in the wood, which then give more tone to the strings. it's a living system, in all senses of it.

i never said that in the context of a busy mix, that modelers didn't do a capable job. they do. used to be a time when one could write off a POD just b/c it was a pod. not anymore. the technology's gotten much better over the last 10 years, and over the next 10 years will only get even better. these are good times.

Sonixx posted the real "cheating", though. Use a modeler for its tones and flavor, and run that through a good, small tube amp, and you're gonna get a variety of great sounds. but in this regard, your modeler's really another effects box, since the major selling point of a modeler is that it's a "replacement" or "substitute" for the tube amp, so that one can record at night, etc. Using it as an effects box with a real amp breaks all the rules. ;-)


wade

 

[Kevzmusic]

IMO, it has little to do with feedback, at least, for me. it's more that the volume from the speaker interacts with fibers in the wood, which then give more tone to the strings. it's a living system, in all senses of it.

i never said that in the context of a busy mix, that modelers didn't do a capable job. they do. used to be a time when one could write off a POD just b/c it was a pod. not anymore. the technology's gotten much better over the last 10 years, and over the next 10 years will only get even better. these are good times.

Sonixx posted the real "cheating", though. Use a modeler for its tones and flavor, and run that through a good, small tube amp, and you're gonna get a variety of great sounds. but in this regard, your modeler's really another effects box, since the major selling point of a modeler is that it's a "replacement" or "substitute" for the tube amp, so that one can record at night, etc. Using it as an effects box with a real amp breaks all the rules. ;-)


wade

YEP, some folks DO use the Line6 modellers as just a preamp with FX, etc., and run it into a real power amp & cab, especially for live gigs....

However, for my direct recording, in my home studio....I'm still using studio monitors - right, so there 'is' a speaker/cone/wood element involved with regard to the 'listening' part, although, not in the actuall 'recording' chain - of course.

KEV