Peavey ReValver III

T

thisjanuary

New member
Hey,

I just picked this up and it's kinda overwhelming me with all the options and possibilities. I'm just trying to get a decent high-gain under-control metalcore/death metal tone out of the thing that I can quad-track without it sounding insane, and I seem to be having real trouble getting anything to sound clear at all.

Using it as a wrapped VST plugin within Pro Tools 7.4 (guitar just DI'd into my Mbox).

Anyone used this, or have any advice for me? Unfortunately I don't have a cab right now so I can't mic up a cab and do it that way so DI'ing is the only choice.
 
What exactly do you mean by "clear"? Is it sounding muffled? Could you post a sample?

I reviewed that for FrugalGuitarist.com (full review here)and feel it's pretty much the best amp modeling software I've heard.

With regards to tips, the easiest thing is to just start with presets to see which amp models and cabs they use to get certain tones. Once you become familiar with the software's capabilities then you'll be able to tweak the heck out of it.
 
revalver's a pretty decent modeling program, but i would recommend downloading voxengo boogex and using it to load 3rd party cabinet IR's in place of the ones revalver supplies. the amp modeling is top-notch...the cab modeling, not so much.
 
yeah i'm using boogex and a few third party mesa/engl cab impulses, they sound pretty nice.

i just mean i'm quad-tracking, i.e. two takes on the left channel and two takes on the right. listening to the four tracks without any modelling on, i'm playing them perfectly tight, but then when i apply the models to all four it just gets really un-precise, but just using two makes it sound weak.

i need to strike some middle ground and i've tried stuff like turning the gain down but it's not working.
 
thisjanuary said:
yeah i'm using boogex and a few third party mesa/engl cab impulses, they sound pretty nice.

i just mean i'm quad-tracking, i.e. two takes on the left channel and two takes on the right. listening to the four tracks without any modelling on, i'm playing them perfectly tight, but then when i apply the models to all four it just gets really un-precise, but just using two makes it sound weak.

i need to strike some middle ground and i've tried stuff like turning the gain down but it's not working.
Click to expand...

IMHO, you really don't need quad tracking to make something sound huge. In fact, I think you can do it with a single track with some processing. Here's a sample clip from the FrugalGuitarist.com review of the Boss GT-10: link. The rhythm track is panned 100% left and I have a very short and dry convolution verb send returning 100% right to add a little depth. Now, If I double tracked the stereo width would sound a little bigger but I would loose some of the tightness as no matter how perfectly I played the track it would not be exactly the same.
 
see now that guitar clip there sounds terrible to me. dull, lifeless, and flat. that's just my opinion.

and elastic time in pro tools 7.4 is REALLY useful for playing things perfectly more than once.
 
thisjanuary said:
see now that guitar clip there sounds terrible to me. dull, lifeless, and flat. that's just my opinion.

and elastic time in pro tools 7.4 is REALLY useful for playing things perfectly more than once.
Click to expand...

Of course, you're entitled to your opinion. I get as many complements as I get criticisms and take it all with a grain of salt. It takes thick skin to put your real name and reputation on the line month after month.

I use SONAR which has similar time shifting abilities. But why even double track if you're going to spend the time to try and quantize it? It's the slight imperfections in timing which gives double tracking its unique tone.

Sorry I couldn't help you out. Good luck.
 
that sound is pretty decent actually. (except for the drums, uggh imo)

however, i think double tracking would have still benefitted from this alot.

many hosts have the ability to tighten things up, pro tools isnt alone in this.

My advice is learn your parts well and double them :D
 
thisjanuary said:
yeah i'm using boogex and a few third party mesa/engl cab impulses, they sound pretty nice.

i just mean i'm quad-tracking, i.e. two takes on the left channel and two takes on the right. listening to the four tracks without any modelling on, i'm playing them perfectly tight, but then when i apply the models to all four it just gets really un-precise, but just using two makes it sound weak.

i need to strike some middle ground and i've tried stuff like turning the gain down but it's not working.
Click to expand...

you can apply different processing to each , eq or verb wise.

for instance, maybe one of the instances on either side can be concentrated on the higher or midrange, and then one can be a low end, chunk chunk sound.
 
jasonbmerrill said:
that sound is pretty decent actually. (except for the drums, uggh imo)

however, i think double tracking would have still benefitted from this alot.

many hosts have the ability to tighten things up, pro tools isnt alone in this.

My advice is learn your parts well and double them :D
Click to expand...

Thanks. On my publishing schedule, I never get to spend enough time on the backing tracks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top