Micing cabs vs. Amp Simulators

  • Thread starter Thread starter lttoler
  • Start date Start date
Here's my 2 cents on that "hot" subject ;)

Comparing amps sim and their real life conterpart is like...comparing a Yaris and a Hummer. Which one is the best ? They both get you from point A to point B right ? "Hell Jayess, those cars doesn't have the same purposes !

With real amps, you can achieve the most pristine sound, if :

* you have the cash
* the space
* a sound engineer or you are skilled in that field of expertise
* you have the cash :D

With amp sims, your sound would probably be less stellar, but you get those benefits :

* Save space
* Save cash
* FLEXIBILITY (note the capital letters)
* etc.

So you have to ask this question : can I afford the drawbacks of real life amps ? if the answer is "yes", go for the real thing. If your answer is "no" (like me), amps sim is the way to go. I just start recording with the PODxt and POD farm and with a bit (read a lot) of tweaking, I can get a monster sound out of it.
 
jayess said:
* FLEXIBILITY (note the capital letters)
Click to expand...

I have not really found any amp sims to be more flexible than a decent (not super expensive) tube amp and a few guitar pedals. Quite the opposite in fact.

As a guy that mixes records for lots of other people for a living I can tell you that almost 100% of the time the tracks recorded with real amps are superior to the amp sim tracks, even when recorded by amateurs with less than stellar equipment.
 
you are mixing two concept in my opinion. flexibility and sound quality. Even if all the amp models are average in, let say, the podxt, this is still 70+ amps that you have at your finger tips with sh*t load of effects VS a 2 channel amp.

furthermore, you wont convince me that a 300$ amp, let alone the other proper equipment required, will give me a better recording sound than my podxt (and I'm not talking about the hassle of getting the proper environement, positioning of the mics, etc.).

Is analog better than modeling sound wise ? I believe yes, of course. But the best sound quality comes at a price, time and patience that some can't affort.
 
This is a little off-topic, but as I was reading this thread I was thinking about the preponderance of acoustic guitars fitted with active electronics and how that sound predominates in popular music.

They don't sound anything like a mic'd acoustic but the sound has, for better or worse (worse, IMO), become part of the lexicon.

Surely these guitars have their advantages in live situations particularly, but they still don't sound like an acoustic - not to my ears, anyway. (This is another of my beefs with Clapton.) But the the sound contains enough of the characteristics of a "pure" acoustic to be recognizable (and I guess acceptable) as an acoustic.

Back to amps and modelers, so much popular music is overprocessed that it's impossible to tell anything about the guitar amps anyway. I'd say that in the commercial pop arena, modelers can do the job just fine. For music that depends on the certain sound of an actual amp, only a real live amp is going to cut it.
 
jayess said:
* Save space
* Save cash
* FLEXIBILITY (note the capital letters)
* etc.
Click to expand...

Actually, the big benefit for a Pod, in my eyes, is repeatability. If I'm working on a song, finish a take, break for the night, and come back the next morning and decide the solo's great but there's one note where I'm just a little TOO behind the beat, or something, with a Pod it's a simple matterof just plugging in and calling up the patch you were using. With a real amp, if I've either changed settings to record another part (especially true for me since I run my Recto with a THD Hot Plate and often record rhythms and leads with different amounts of poweram saturation) or even accidently nudged the mic since I last tracked a part (not hard, since I work in my bedroom), then it's almost impossible to seamlessly punch in a new note or two. I can either recut the solo or leave it.

It's not the end of the word, especially since sometimes it's good to force yourself not to get hung up over every last little detail, but that is the one clear advantage I see for a Pod over my amp.
 
lttoler said:
http://www.myspace.com/mercuryheatband

here is a link to my band. "Should've Done" is using the amp sims. "Thing Called Love" is micing the cab. I am using a Mesa F-50 clean channel with a Fulltone OCD in front for the most part, which is my live setup and sounds great in reality but poor on recording.
Click to expand...

The obvious thing is you cant compare sims and mic'ing using two different songs, two different sounds.

Distorted guitar recording is far more difficult than recording clean guitar. What is not obvious is less distortion will sound just as good in the recording, more distortion will make it harder to record and harder to mix.

I am no expert on mic'ing cabs, but what I hear in your clip is a distorted guitar that isn't mic'd properly. I know everybody raves about using the SM57 on guitar cab, but I disagree. Why would I get the perfect guitar sound coming out of my amp, and then mic it with a mic that has a presence boost?

pickups and amp settings will have the most impact on the recorded sound, followed by mic choice and mic placement. no easy task.........
 
Ronan said:
I have not really found any amp sims to be more flexible than a decent (not super expensive) tube amp and a few guitar pedals. Quite the opposite in fact.

As a guy that mixes records for lots of other people for a living I can tell you that almost 100% of the time the tracks recorded with real amps are superior to the amp sim tracks, even when recorded by amateurs with less than stellar equipment.
Click to expand...

I allways record Guitar amps with a mic...this is true...but bass is not something that will ever give you better results with an amp miced up.

Ive found there are several advantages and plain practicality to going direct in on bass with a sansamp than lugging that svt into the tracking room and having it bleed onto the drums.
 
Remember when humbucker pickups first came out? Obviously humbucking pickups are complete crap because they don't have the sparkle of the original single coil pickups. That's why I sold all my stock on Gibson before that "Les Paul" nonsense took the whole company down the drain.

Remember when CDs first came out? All the purists refused to give up vinyl because the digital format sounded too harsh. Based on that insight, I sold all my stock in Philips so that I didn't lose all my money in the huge commercial failure of the Compact Disc.

Remember when file format compression came out? All the purists refused to listen because they sound so horrible. Thank my lucky stars that I sold all of my Apple stock so that I didn't lose all my money in the huge commercial failure known as the iPod.

It seems to me that the relevant question should be for the typical homerecording.com reader, is amp modeling technology comparable to micing a cabinet? We all seem to agree that micing a cabinet is 1) more complicated, and 2) can produce better results. Therefore, it sounds like the typical homerecording.com reader would probably enjoy dabbling in amp modeling while they learn how to properly mic a cabinet. To say that modeling is useless in that context is absurd.

But then again, these are the same guys who hated humbucking pickups, hated CDs, and hated the iPod. You gotta take that advice with a huge grain of salt.
 
darrin_h2000 said:
I allways record Guitar amps with a mic...this is true...but bass is not something that will ever give you better results with an amp miced up.

Ive found there are several advantages and plain practicality to going direct in on bass with a sansamp than lugging that svt into the tracking room and having it bleed onto the drums.
Click to expand...
Not to pick on Darrin, but this statement proves how situationally specific all of these opinions actually are.

I would never have the bass and drums in the same room with an amp.

I'm actually re-amping bass through an SVT right now because the sound I need for this project will only come from an SVT. I probably won't even use the DI signal in the mix.


Amp simulators don't necessarily sound exactly like the amp they are emulating. You can alway hear a difference between a JCM800 model and an actuall JCM 800...Of course, you can hear a difference between two JCM800's sitting next to each other, same model, same settings. So it really doesn't matter.

I always thought that if the Pod people would not tell you what amp they were modelling, this debate would go away and everyone would just try it out to see if they liked the sound. If they didn't, they would move on with their lives.

All that said, I use Pods and other simulators all the time. go to this page http://www.farviewrecording.com/html/sound_clips.html and see if you can tell which songs were using pods and which were mic'd cabinets.

If you can't tell by listening to the finished product, the whole argument is a waste of time.
 
When I mic my amp I don't pay any attention to the sound coming out of the amp at all. I listen to the sound coming out of my monitors, same as you would with a modeller.

If you're having bad results miking and good results modelling, that might be the answer. I dunno, just my 2cents.
 
RejectionNinja said:
It seems to me that the relevant question should be for the typical homerecording.com reader, is amp modeling technology comparable to micing a cabinet? We all seem to agree that micing a cabinet is 1) more complicated, and 2) can produce better results. Therefore, it sounds like the typical homerecording.com reader would probably enjoy dabbling in amp modeling while they learn how to properly mic a cabinet. To say that modeling is useless in that context is absurd.
Click to expand...

Actually, that's something I'd contend with, that the typical person using an amp modeler is still trying to learn how to mic an amp.

I mean, the Pod XT is a $300 peice of gear. Your typical home recording guy has a fairly tight budget; does it seem probable that someone would drop $300 on a peice of gear they were only going to use for a few months to maybe two years, while they gradually got better at micing?

Rather, I suspect the typical Pod user is basing their decision on more dogmatic grounds - that to their ears, the Pod sounds almost as good as a mic'd amp and it's way easier to use, so if they buy a Pod then they don't have to buy mics and stands and learn now to position them just right to get the best possible sound out of their amp. Not as an "easy button" to record with while they get better, but rather as an alternative to even learning. I mean, if you can plug in and go and get a servicable tone, why even spend the time experimenting with mic placement?

This is of course a totally valid philosophy, that if it gets you 90% of the way there with 1% of the work, then the remaining 99% of the work for that last 10% may not be as worthwhile a use of your time as focusing on other areas. And, this is especially true if you're not primarily a guitarist, so having super-lush guitar tones isn't a priority for you. However, in my particular case I AM a guitarist, and I appreciate a good challange, so micing up was a no brainer.
 
Farview said:
Not to pick on Darrin, but this statement proves how situationally specific all of these opinions actually are.

I would never have the bass and drums in the same room with an amp.

.
Click to expand...

I have to say that I like to get the groove of a live rythem section all playing off one another...and you have to do the tracks at the same time to do that...I have an isolation cabinet for the rythem Guitar with a classic 30 with a single SM57, sitting outside the tracking room...where only drums are miked up...bass goes through a tech21 sansamp...all monitor with headphones.

So pick on me if you like...but Im not the one needing to reamp a bass track...lol.
 
wbcsound said:
It really depends on what you're trying to achieve and the tools available to you. Sure a nice amp in a nice room with a nice mic and a nice pre is going to out perform most amp modeling software. However, if you're working on a project in a tiny room and the noise level is a concern to your neighbors/ family members or your working on a track over the corse of days/weeks and need to have a consistent tone when you punch in you can get some very convincing results going direct using an amp modelor.

I think the difference is much less pronounced between close micing and amp modeling, but its much harder to get an amp in a room sound however a nice convolution based reverb to simulate room sound does wonders.
Click to expand...

See, that's a great example of how to help someone in an internet forum.


ocnor said:
Line6 amp sims sound absolutely nothing like a real amp. They are buzzy, lifeless,and one dimensional sounding. You should hear a huge difference when micing an amp.

So either:
A. you are tonedeaf
B. your amp sucks
C. you don't know how to mic an amp correctly
D. one or more of the above apply
Click to expand...

And this is a great example of how NOT to give advice on the internet.
 
darrin_h2000 said:
I have to say that I like to get the groove of a live rythem section all playing off one another...and you have to do the tracks at the same time to do that...I have an isolation cabinet for the rythem Guitar with a classic 30 with a single SM57, sitting outside the tracking room...where only drums are miked up...bass goes through a tech21 sansamp...all monitor with headphones.

So pick on me if you like...but Im not the one needing to reamp a bass track...lol.
Click to expand...
The bass and the drums are recorded at the same time. The direct signal doesn't cut it, so I run it through the amp.

If I didn't have a guitar going at the same time, I would have had the bass cabinet in my iso booth and not had to reamp.

I have the drums in the drum room, the bass player and guitarist are in the control room monitoring through my mains with the guitar cabinet in an iso booth and the bass running direct. Everyone still sees each other and everyone plays at the same time.
 
DrewPeterson7 said:
Actually, that's something I'd contend with, that the typical person using an amp modeler is still trying to learn how to mic an amp. [...]
Rather, I suspect the typical Pod user is basing their decision on more dogmatic grounds - that to their ears, the Pod sounds almost as good as a mic'd amp and it's way easier to use, so if they buy a Pod then they don't have to buy mics and stands and learn now to position them just right to get the best possible sound out of their amp. Not as an "easy button" to record with while they get better, but rather as an alternative to even learning. I mean, if you can plug in and go and get a servicable tone, why even spend the time experimenting with mic placement?
Click to expand...

I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think that's what "dogmatic" means.

I think what you describe is 100% true - for many homerecording.com readers, the ability to quickly produce a distinguishable sound and put together a multi-track demo is probably a very tempting goal. Obviously it's not for everyone (and if I had the budget, I'd have a collection of vintage all-tube bass amps) but for the amateur guy making recordings at home, there is a lot of bang for the buck in that $300.

And I here I'm using the word "distinguishable" because the modeled Marshall Plexi doesn't sound exactly like the real thing, but it sounds very different than the modeled Fender Blackface, and it sounds very different from the modeled Sovtek Mig. Right there you can record 3 different guitar tracks that will be distinguishable from each other. It's a fantastic tool for making recordings at home.

And I wish I were better at micing a speaker cabinet. ;)
 
what I like

I have used both, and recently I run from my modeling amp D.I. into Pro Tools. It comes across as less digital this way. Micking pushes air, and no sim cam emulate air/feedback quite right. Check out my weekly blog at http://homerecordingweekly.blogspot.com/
 
RejectionNinja said:
I agree with what you're saying, but I don't think that's what "dogmatic" means.

I think what you describe is 100% true - for many homerecording.com readers, the ability to quickly produce a distinguishable sound and put together a multi-track demo is probably a very tempting goal. Obviously it's not for everyone (and if I had the budget, I'd have a collection of vintage all-tube bass amps) but for the amateur guy making recordings at home, there is a lot of bang for the buck in that $300.

And I here I'm using the word "distinguishable" because the modeled Marshall Plexi doesn't sound exactly like the real thing, but it sounds very different than the modeled Fender Blackface, and it sounds very different from the modeled Sovtek Mig. Right there you can record 3 different guitar tracks that will be distinguishable from each other. It's a fantastic tool for making recordings at home.

And I wish I were better at micing a speaker cabinet. ;)
Click to expand...

I agree "dogmatic" wasn't the perfect word, but what I was trying to say is that the decision to go modeler is more based on the relative merits of modeling vs micing, ante facto, than it is about a constant re-evaluation of the sounds you're getting with one vs. the sounds you're getting with the other, with the intent to switch over as soon as it's feasible.

I.e - someone who goes out and buys a Pod XT does so because they personally believe that using a Pod will get them "good enough for a mix" guitar tones and that they don't think it's worth the hassle of learning how to mic. I think it's way less likely that they'd go out and drop $300 on a tool to use for 6 months so they can still make "good enough for a mix" recordings while they learn how to mic. They're two totally different approaches; it's not like a Pod is training wheels to make it easier to get good sounds while you work on mic position, but rather a totally different animal that means you don't have to learn.

And, I guess, my feeling is that you're better off making 6 months to a year of shitty sounding guitar tracks if at the end of that time you're making good-sounding mic'd tracks, rather than go with a Pod and from day one it's as good as it's going to get. Then again, the noise considerations for me aren't as bad - my roommates are pretty guitar tolerant, and I don't have a 1 year old or anything. ;)
 
Farview said:
The bass and the drums are recorded at the same time. The direct signal doesn't cut it, so I run it through the amp.

If I didn't have a guitar going at the same time, I would have had the bass cabinet in my iso booth and not had to reamp.

I have the drums in the drum room, the bass player and guitarist are in the control room monitoring through my mains with the guitar cabinet in an iso booth and the bass running direct. Everyone still sees each other and everyone plays at the same time.
Click to expand...

The iso cabinet sounds like a good choice for you then...I dont have the space for a seperate Drum room and an iso booth...Id only record guitars with mics...so I have to make do with a cab...but I still think that bass through a sansamp gives me better results than miking an amp.
 
DrewPeterson7 said:
I.e - someone who goes out and buys a Pod XT does so because they personally believe that using a Pod will get them "good enough for a mix" guitar tones and that they don't think it's worth the hassle of learning how to mic. I think it's way less likely that they'd go out and drop $300 on a tool to use for 6 months so they can still make "good enough for a mix" recordings while they learn how to mic. They're two totally different approaches; it's not like a Pod is training wheels to make it easier to get good sounds while you work on mic position, but rather a totally different animal that means you don't have to learn.
;)
Click to expand...

You guys talk like Line6 makes the only modelers and that is the only method...while there are great analog modelers like the Tech21 stuff.

And learning Mic position doesnt have to be difficult...there are plenty of good books out there that will tell you exactly what you need to know about that...just get one and study it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top