kcearl
I see deaf people
I dont listen to the radio....
I dont listen to the radio....
darrin_h2000
Banned
You should...you would find out your stuff went out of style decades ago...lol.
kcearl
I see deaf people
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
Actually, Drew...I did say that early on...like back on page 3, and you actually quoted me from this exact post:
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.
I don't really see that you (or anyone) had to "defend modeling as a valid technology"...I was very clear that it simply didn't appeal to *me*...that I could never get past its digital pedigree.
Shortly after I made the comments in the above quote...the thread took a kind of kooky turn, and we were talking about models and transsexuals and whatnot...
...then EZ came back again looking to prove to me I was wrong about MY feelings about modelers. So like...who was really having to defend their position…?
After that...the discussion once again went off in a funny direction about beer and amps.
EZ again came back later for several tries to again prove to me the pods/modeling had a purpose. At one point I even joked with him that if he's going to wait 15 hours between posts this would take a long time.
So again...who was really having defending their position…?
I said a few times that I clearly understood why people buy pods (doesn’t that validate the technology?)...and that it WAS possible to use them and get a good sounding tone in certain mixes...and that I didn't care if other's used them...
…but that I had no use for them.
It's THAT position that caused a lot of additional counter posts to be made to convince me that pods were as useable as amps are…or whatever.
So like...how many ways did I need to say "use them if it works for you...but I don't care for them"...before some people let it go and stopped trying to convince me to the contrary???
I was defending my position for not liking pods much more than anyone was defending theirs for using them. I never even attacked anyone specifically for using them...I just said I didn't think they were of any value and served no purpose for *me*.
I said it earlier...it's no secret that unless you are in almost total agreement with people's music/audio/gear choices in any forum thread discussion...there is ALWAYS going to be some sort of debate between opposing views.
Thing is...if one person says “A”....and 5 people say “B”...usually the “B” group feels they are MORE right (cuz there are 5 of them). If the “A” person holds his ground, the “B” group often keeps countering back.
Of course, when some members of the “B” group get mean/nasty, and resort to mocks, name calling and pure BS in order to further "discredit" the "A" person's choice...then again I ask….who was really having to “defend” their position?
But I’ve let this thread go for the last two days…and if no one had resurrected it (at least the stuff having anything to do with me)…I had NO intention of coming back into it.
Since you pretty much asked me to respond with your last post…well, I came back and responded.
Hopefully…the earlier nastiness won’t also now be resurrected.
I only apologize to TAE for my part in taking his tread on a wild ride...and point out that there were several other people pushing the cart real hard too and not wanting to let it go.
I think the problem is that "pods" HAVE become quite convenient for a lot of folks and many have made do with them...so, no matter how I presented my dislike of pods/modeling...there ain't no way I was going to get a free pass on my position without a counter-argument to discredit my view.
And what can I say...I usually tend to hold my ground pretty hard.
Sometimes it's a good thing...sometimes it's probably not worth it.
Anyway…have good one.
darrin_h2000
Banned
Like them or not...Im seeing more major shows with those Line6 floor units producing the tones...about 75% of the time...so Its not just the savvy kids using them...its the major artists as well...you cant fight progress.
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.
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.
TAE
All you have is now
It's not weird it is cool. We're moving forward.
For the longest time I was dead set that there was no way a leslie emulator would ever pass for the real deal. "Ya can't get the dopler effect from a stationary speaker".. you can't but close enough now to eliminate a leslie from my gear list.
Two years ago we went and watched Amos Lee at the Belly up Bar n grill in San Diego. His keyboard player was using a nord electro 61 ..
I was close to the stage and it was driving me crazy. I knew he had to be at least using motion sound ...something with a moving horn... Waited till after the gig and checked it out closely...nope just the Nord.
I still have a real B3 and leslie that I am having a hard time parting with but the truth be told.. blind test I'd be hard pressed at this point to be able to tell the difference.
I'm going to play a back yard party gig this Saturday with just the electro ..It will by first time without a mechanical leslie..
See how it goes.
ez_willis
.
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.
G
Greg_L
Banned
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.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
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.
well now I HAVE to go listen.
listening.........
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.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
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.
No EZ...I agreed a few times that there was a market for them and that there probably will be for the mic too...
...I only added thay in my opinion, the reasons for there being a market are not reasons that are valid enough for me use them and that their purpose was just a "good enough" alternative to the real thing.
You're simply stuck on that and have been stuck on that throughout the whole thread...the fact that I’m not buying in…that's why you keep coming back trying to convince me.
Why can't I be allowed that perspective without you and your homeboyz continuing to push this thread into some personal mud-slinging contest?
*sigh*
AFA the guitar playing...put up or shut up.
You're welcome to view solos as some formulaic process that's about specific notes needing to go together...whatever works for you.
If it pleases you guys to continue with the mocking and name calling...knock yourselves out.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
1.) Tube amps please me more than any modeler could…aesthetically.
2.) Playing a tube amp in the room is a totally different vibe than playing a pod.
3.) Not sure exactly which clips you're listening to...the album or the YouTube...but...
…the YouTube clip was recorded into a DAW...combined with the video in a video app...rendered down to a video format for upload to YouTube…then compressed/converted by YouTube to the Flash format...
...so that "tubey goodness" ain't going to translate out through all that, but again, I've agreed earlier in this thread that in a mix, the tones are not easily recognizable as to where they came from, but rather it's mostly when playing that a tube amp trumps a pod most times, and I don’t know why I even have to defend that point as there are a lot of players that would never play through anything but a real tube amp…for most of the same reasons.
(The album clips have also gone through at least 4-5 conversions...from live "tubey goodness" to the MP3file.)
Again…people are free to use that works for them…but pods/modeling doesn’t work for me.
Let’s not go back through all the same points all over again in this thread…’cuz there’s no point.
ez_willis
.
ez_willis
.
and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again and again..............
mshilarious
Banned
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.
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.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
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.
miroslav
Cosmic Cowboy
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.
mshilarious
Banned
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 . . .
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 . . .
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
To be clear, I've ALWAYS said I way prefer a tube amp to a modeler. You can search my posts sometime if you're bored and you'll pretty much see me saying that to my ears a modeler flat out sucks compared to a tube amp for live work
I don't feel as strongly for recording and here's why.
The very thing that bothers me about modelers is that compression. On a gig I need to be able to, for example, 'bear down' a bit and bring my guitar to the front of the mix. Can't really do that very well with a modelers' compressed sound.
So you end up having to have multiple presets at varying volume levels and you're constantly tapdancing around the presets. Pretty distracting to your playing.
But recording you tend to frecord seperate tracks for the different guitar sounds you'll use and it's not as big a deal to reach over and change presets or nudge the volume control.
I'm with ya' on the tube amp thing and I also agree that there are lots of modelers that sound better than Line 6 stuff. I pretty much rank PODs at the bottom.
Where we part ways is that I don't think it's neccessary for you to jump in and tell someone that what they're doing can't possibly be any good if it's a modeler.
First, that's not true ...... secondly ......... if someone posts a thread about gtheir new modeler or a thread about how can they get such and such a sound out of their modeler ..... it's totally off topic for you to repeatedly bash modelers and refer to your own preferences as if that has any bearing on the topic at hand.
QQ and I used to go round and round about a similar thing.
He HATES Behringer ...... freakin' HATES it!
So some newbie would post a thread about his new piece of Behringer gear he's excited about and Q would come back with something like "What a piece of shit!"
I just don't think that disparaging other peoples gear is useful and it's definitely annoying.
But in general, I agree with you about tubeamps which is why I have a quite largish collection of nice ones.
Lt. Bob
Spread the Daf!
I've got a Rocktron Utopia and for quite a few of my current gigs I run it direct into the PA with no amp at all.
I manage to get an acceptable sound ..... one decent enough where I'm not distracted by it all night.
For some gigs it's sufficient.
To me the key is going low gain on these things. They sound a lot more real if you keep the fuzz/buzz out of them.
But I also find the Rocktron to be a superior sounding modeler and I have 5 or 6 of the things.
A POD, V-Amp2, 3 or 4 Digitechs including an expensive rackmount. The Rocktron smokes 'em all soundwise.
I think eventually modelers will be competitive with a nice amp but they're not there yet.
Yeah, the presets bite.
Basically it's just like an amp in that if you know what you're doing you can get them dialed in so they sound decent.
If you don't then they won't.
I hear LOTS of guitarists get shit tone out of what should be good sounding rigs. For them it don't matter what they use because they don't know how to get a good sound regardless.