Reamping solution - could this work??

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mikeyprs
  • Start date Start date
Re-amping is so foreign from how I view electric guitar, I play off the amps (or sims) sound, if I change the sound, the playing changes. They go together. Same with delay and reverb, if they're not (recorded) on the original track, I write down the setting so I cant lose the original "feel" of the track.

Nothing wrong with experimenting though if thats your thing.
 
Mikeyprs said:
...and record numerous takes of amp tones till I found something I like.
Click to expand...

If that's what works for you...it's cool, and might be the way to go if you say, walked into a studio where there were a bunch of amps you've never tried or you borrowed/rented amps you've never owned, but otherwise I would think if it's your amp(s), you would/should already have a pretty good idea about tones you liked and could get with said amp(s)...so from there it really is mostly just trowing up a mic and hitting record and the tones you already know will be recorded with only some minor tweaks.

I do get the feeling that as Greg mentioned, re-amping while not a new approach, has become the "in thing" to do right from the git-go. I would think that if it's YOUR music and YOU are the one recording and making production decisions...why leave it all for later? Just record with the production ideas/plans you have in your head and be done with it. :)
Leaving too many decisions for the later, mixing stages can become a PITA as much as it can provide you with way too many choices.

I have a Radial X-Amp and other assorted boxes/gadgets for any type of job just because I feel that I should have them in a studio setting, along with various amps...but I have yet to feel the need to record a DI track and then re-amp it later to find the tones I want.

But again...if that's what works for you, then enjoy!
Sometimes the best part about recording is the experimentation. :cool:
 
Greg_L said:
This lazy approach to recording shows in their music too. It always seems to be the cookie-cutter screamo-core-melodic-metal guys that bust a nut over re-amping. For me, it's not even about them not playing it again, it's about learning something. Recording a nice guitar tone isn't that freaking hard. It's not as easy as just hanging a mic anywhere, but it's not the most technically demanding aspect of recording. If you have functioning ears and a good sense of tone, it shouldn't be a problem. To me, re-amping should be a last-ditch effort to hopefully fix a track in the event the guitarist has broken both of his hands and his gear was stolen by gypsies rendering him unable to track it again. It shouldn't be a planned part of the recording process.
Click to expand...

Missed this thread. But reamping is rarely a plan A for me. It's always an "in case shit goes south" mentality. Like if a guitarist walks in and ABSOLUTELY MUST have his gain dimed on his spider III for "his sound". lol

Or in rarer cases where a band wants an amp I don't have, but that's happened once. I don't get it as a main plan of attack either.
 
Guitargodgt said:
It's always an "in case shit goes south" mentality. Like if a guitarist walks in and ABSOLUTELY MUST have his gain dimed on his spider III for "his sound". lol

Or in rarer cases where a band wants an amp I don't have, but that's happened once. I don't get it as a main plan of attack either.
Click to expand...


Yup...for a studio setting, especially a commercial studio, it's necessary to have all kinds of options and some back-up plans, because you never know when the artists or producer will change their minds, which you can not read ahead of time.
I'm mainly looking at it from the home-rec perspective where most guys are recording their own music, so mind-reading is not needed, and IMHO, I just believe it's better to go with a more defined production when at all possible, though there are those rare times when you might want to lay down tracks just to see where things go, and then worry about how to make it all cohesive later on.
Talking Heads recorded some of their stuff, like the "Remain in Light" album, in that manner. Just compiling a huge number of tracks without any planned production...though I'm sure they had some ideas...and then during mixing they decided which tracks were going to be used and which would be discarded.
It's a fun way to experiment, and you might come up with something you never expected, but that was done for all the tracks, not just "guitar tones".

My own approach to "guitar tones" is pretty simple/straightforward, and I usually prefer to have my tone at the time of tracking, rather than deciding later.
 
Wow... reamping is just another tool in the toolbox.

Me thinks some of you are way over thinking this. :eek: :)
 
One can say that reamping leads to over-thinking.
It's much simpler to just get your tone and be done with it. ;)
 
Mikeyprs said:
Hey everyone,

What I think I have potentially discovered/stumbled upon is a way I could potentially “re-amp” guitar tracks without the possibility of spending say £100 or so on a Re-Amp box using this method which I’ve yet to truly test as of yet but I would like to you know what you guys think of this potential idea.
Click to expand...
you're missing the reason to have a re-amping device. As jimmy69 says ..... the re-amping device isn't simply a routing device. Your method will certainly get a signal to the amp. But it'll sound like crap because you'll be sending a line signal and whatever impedances go with it to an amp that's designed to take a guitar level signal with guitar level impedances. The amp will not behave or sound right.
 
Last edited:
miroslav said:
One can say that reamping leads to over-thinking.
It's much simpler to just get your tone and be done with it. ;)
Click to expand...

maybe but for some people getting their tone might be easier if the re-amp. And you might change your mind about what tone you want.

personally, I've almost never re-amped and that was always for some strange sound I suddenly decided I wanted to try an get.
 
I was only teasing... ;)
I agree that if someone likes/needs re-amping to get their end result...it's the right way for them.

One reason I don't find/see too much reason for it in my own recording (even though I have a re-amp rig), is that I generally record my leads at the very end of all the other tracks. So by that time I already know what tone I'm after. I don't need to figure it out later.
For rhythm guitars...that's pretty much a part of the pre-production planning. I'm already deciding if it's going to be crunch/dirty or clean and articulate...etc...and that's what sets the vibe for the rest of the tracks. Doing them DI/naked just wouldn't work, and once I set and I get use to the sound, I'm not going to want to change it later.

There's been maybe a couple of times I've actually gone back to re-record guitars because I really didn't like the "tone"...but usually the tone is always in the ballpark and the final shaping occurs with a few turns of some EQ knobs. :)

The only "concern" I see with re-amping, is that it can easily become a "crutch"...an absolute SOP...and then you end up never being able to just find a tone and track, because you are always thinking... "what if...?"...and always saving all those decisions for later.
YMMV.....
 
Sonixx said:
Wow... reamping is just another tool in the toolbox.

Me thinks some of you are way over thinking this. :eek: :)
Click to expand...
One man's "overthinking" is another's "joy of experimentation".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top