A MESSAGE TO ALL AMPLIFIER BUILDERS: PLEASE READ

[lolzgreg]

Why do you hate reamping?

It defeats the point of a good guitar amp, IMO. What are we all chasing on this forum? A great guitar sound while we are actually playing the guitar. That sound creates a vibe between the player and the amp and when it is just right inspires the player to play at his/her best. As a recording engineer for over 15 years, I would go for a track that has that interaction and emotion in it a million times over one that might sound "better." A very famous producer told me a long time ago that you can never make a bad performance sound good.

From a technical standpoint, I am not a huge fan of converting the guitar signal that many times. Even with high quality converters, it will never be the same as the original signal going in to the amp.

If I were a manufacturer of amplifiers, I would not want a reamped clip to be the representation of my amplifier. Reamping is a very controlled situation, and could possibly misrepresent what the amp can do. I would much rather hear a clip of a live player that dialed in an awesome tone and let it rip. That is how the amp is going to be used the vast majority of the time anyway.

I don't care if I can tell if a guitar amp has been reamped or not, and I don't care how many amps are reamped in the studio these days. I can not stand most modern production (especially metal) these days anyway. It sounds completely fake, and I guess with a completely triggered drumset or computerized drum program and all reamped guitars it kind of is.

To summarize, performance is key. Playing an amp with a great tone inspires the player to play better. Get that and there is absolutely no need to reamp.

This is my opinion and not meant as a jab to anyone. Different strokes for different folks, right?

When you take a DI and run the "through" signal to an amp while you're taking the DI, it's exactly the same. I'll make some tests later this week.

 

[K Odell]

Why do you hate reamping?

It defeats the point of a good guitar amp, IMO. What are we all chasing on this forum? A great guitar sound while we are actually playing the guitar. That sound creates a vibe between the player and the amp and when it is just right inspires the player to play at his/her best. As a recording engineer for over 15 years, I would go for a track that has that interaction and emotion in it a million times over one that might sound "better." A very famous producer told me a long time ago that you can never make a bad performance sound good.

From a technical standpoint, I am not a huge fan of converting the guitar signal that many times. Even with high quality converters, it will never be the same as the original signal going in to the amp.

If I were a manufacturer of amplifiers, I would not want a reamped clip to be the representation of my amplifier. Reamping is a very controlled situation, and could possibly misrepresent what the amp can do. I would much rather hear a clip of a live player that dialed in an awesome tone and let it rip. That is how the amp is going to be used the vast majority of the time anyway.

I don't care if I can tell if a guitar amp has been reamped or not, and I don't care how many amps are reamped in the studio these days. I can not stand most modern production (especially metal) these days anyway. It sounds completely fake, and I guess with a completely triggered drumset or computerized drum program and all reamped guitars it kind of is.

To summarize, performance is key. Playing an amp with a great tone inspires the player to play better. Get that and there is absolutely no need to reamp.

This is my opinion and not meant as a jab to anyone. Different strokes for different folks, right?

I can sometimes sympathize with a more purist type of attitude, but these days people want super polished sounding records. And Reamping can be a life saver if your mic'ed tracks don't come out as good as possible.

BUT on the flipside of the purist attitude. I also think your fans deserve the best sounding product possible and if that means reamping or sound replacing then so be it bc in the end they will be what gets you where you want to be.

As I said I can see both sides. Sabbath wouldn't have sounded the same or had the same impact if they had todays production, but it sure would be cool to hear it.

EDIT: I will also add that I know a lot of people aren't playing to get somewhere, but just for the joy of playing. So in that situation I know that the end product really only matters to the musician at that point.

 

[Anonymous]

IMO the player is infinitely more important to the quality of a clip then the recording gear or engineer.

Bingo!

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

I really don't get this whole thing. IMO the player is infinitely more important to the quality of a clip then the recording gear or engineer.

If I was trying to bill myself as a great clip maker, my selling point would be my chops first, and the studio quality would just be the icing on the cake...

I agree with this 100%, no way would I want to play my amps when I could get Ralph or Carl to do it When it comes to money I know of no attitude

Even though I could definitely get much better players, I'll still prolly do a lot of the clips of my own amp myself. I just like to play the guitar too much to let others have all the fun!

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

Even with high quality converters, it will never be the same as the original signal going in to the amp.

If that is true, then you should have no problem telling me which clips I recorded with my amp and guitar and which were re-amped, right? Are you ready to put your ears where your keyboard is?

I'll put up a few clips - all the same amp and guitar, some reamped and some not and you tell me which are which. I dare ya!

 

[killertone]

Even with high quality converters, it will never be the same as the original signal going in to the amp.

If that is true, then you should have no problem telling me which clips I recorded with my amp and guitar and which were re-amped, right? Are you ready to put your ears where your keyboard is?

I'll put up a few clips - all the same amp and guitar, some reamped and some not and you tell me which are which. I dare ya!

Calm down big boy!

I never said I could tell so I don't need to put anything where my keyboard is. In fact, I said that I could care less if couldn't tell. Refer to paragraph 4 in my previous post.

I am not trying to argue and I would rather not.

 

[Bob Savage]

I said that I could care less if couldn't tell.

So, you're saying you DO care!

Sorry, but I just cannot resist. The whole "could" (couldn't) care less phrase is one of those irresistible ones...

 

[killertone]

I said that I could care less if couldn't tell.

So, you're saying you DO care!

Sorry, but I just cannot resist. The whole "could" (couldn't) care less phrase is one of those irresistible ones...

 

[King Crimson]

Douche!


(If any questions... not referring to you Greg.)

Who's Greg, douche nozzle?

 

[EXPcustom]

I dont know which responce to quote first so I wont quote any.

I understand what re-amping is and I am aware they do it a lot now but if its so great why are rock-metal records recorded before the mid-90s reamping craze sounding so much better?

I may not be able to tell the diffrence but it really is not a superior recording method IMO.

 

[Anonymous]

Calm down big boy!

I never said I could tell so I don't need to put anything where my keyboard is. In fact, I said that I could care less if couldn't tell. Refer to paragraph 4 in my previous post.

I am not trying to argue and I would rather not.

I'm not arguing, I'm discussing. The essence of discussion is conflict, else no discussion.

Anyway, here is what you said:

"I don't care if I can tell if a guitar amp has been reamped or not, and I don't care how many amps are reamped in the studio these days. I can not stand most modern production (especially metal) these days anyway. It sounds completely fake, and I guess with a completely triggered drumset or computerized drum program and all reamped guitars it kind of is. "

What does modern production have to do with it? I don't get it. My clips sound like old VH production for the record (the ones I'd post for this purpose anyway) and while you may not like that either you can't deny that if you can't tell the difference, reamping isn't any less valid a technique for getting the tone you want. If you can't tell which clips were reamped and which weren't and the guitars basically sound the same, what does it matter whether you played it just the guitar and amp or DI'd AND played through the same amp and THEN reamped. How is it "fake" if I record through my amp AND DI at the same time and then decide later I'd like a bit more gain on the amp, so I reamp EXACTLY what I played through the SAME amp with a bit more gain. What is fake about that? Whatever I played is still coming through. I can match my live guitar with a reamped signal basically exactly with the tools I have.

This whole argument just seems silly to me. If you could tell the difference between a reamped clip and a live played clip, I'd understand, but if you can't your argument is nonsense. Now I understand if you say, "I just prefer to play it through my amp and record that way.", that's cool - it's your recording STYLE preference. But to say the end result is going to be better not reamping vs. reamping when you admit you wouldn't be able to tell the difference... well... that's ummmm...

Steve

 

[Anonymous]

I understand what re-amping is and I am aware they do it a lot now but if its so great why are rock-metal records recorded before the mid-90s reamping craze sounding so much better?.

Maybe you just prefer the sound of the rock-metal records recorded before the "mid-90s reamping craze", ever think of that? I certainly do, but I also realize that it has nothing to do with reamping. I can play you stuff I've reamped that sounds nothing like a mid-90s rock-metal production and sounds identical to other clips I recorded via mic'd cab straight from my broken fingers.

I may not be able to tell the diffrence but it really is not a superior recording method IMO.

I don't get it man. If you can't tell the difference between two clips - one reamped, one not - and you like the guitar tone, then how is reamping any better or worse? Please explain?

You guys are killin' me with this, I swear!

Steve

 

[tweed]

I understand what re-amping is and I am aware they do it a lot now but if its so great why are rock-metal records recorded before the mid-90s reamping craze sounding so much better?.

Maybe you just prefer the sound of the rock-metal records recorded before the "mid-90s reamping craze", ever think of that? I certainly do, but I also realize that it has nothing to do with reamping. I can play you stuff I've reamped that sounds nothing like a mid-90s rock-metal production and sounds identical to other clips I recorded via mic'd cab straight from my broken fingers.

I may not be able to tell the diffrence but it really is not a superior recording method IMO.

I don't get it man. If you can't tell the difference between two clips - one reamped, one not - and you like the guitar tone, then how is reamping any better or worse? Please explain?

You guys are killin' me with this, I swear!

Steve

Dear Steve,

Please quit it with all this silly bullshit and heat up your soldering iron. NAMM is 5 weeks away and counting.

Thank You,

Randy

 

[Anonymous]

I understand what re-amping is and I am aware they do it a lot now but if its so great why are rock-metal records recorded before the mid-90s reamping craze sounding so much better?.

Maybe you just prefer the sound of the rock-metal records recorded before the "mid-90s reamping craze", ever think of that? I certainly do, but I also realize that it has nothing to do with reamping. I can play you stuff I've reamped that sounds nothing like a mid-90s rock-metal production and sounds identical to other clips I recorded via mic'd cab straight from my broken fingers.

I may not be able to tell the diffrence but it really is not a superior recording method IMO.

I don't get it man. If you can't tell the difference between two clips - one reamped, one not - and you like the guitar tone, then how is reamping any better or worse? Please explain?

You guys are killin' me with this, I swear!

Steve

Dear Steve,

Please quit it with all this silly bullshit and heat up your soldering iron. NAMM is 5 weeks away and counting.

Thank You,

Randy

I'm actually responding to all this and soldering at the same time. So there.

Steve

 

[tweed]

I'm actually responding to all this and soldering at the same time. So there.

Steve

Pics or it's a Bugera.

 

[glpg80]

check out my low end. look at it!!!

 

[EXPcustom]

I understand what re-amping is and I am aware they do it a lot now but if its so great why are rock-metal records recorded before the mid-90s reamping craze sounding so much better?.

Maybe you just prefer the sound of the rock-metal records recorded before the "mid-90s reamping craze", ever think of that? I certainly do, but I also realize that it has nothing to do with reamping. I can play you stuff I've reamped that sounds nothing like a mid-90s rock-metal production and sounds identical to other clips I recorded via mic'd cab straight from my broken fingers.

I may not be able to tell the diffrence but it really is not a superior recording method IMO.

I don't get it man. If you can't tell the difference between two clips - one reamped, one not - and you like the guitar tone, then how is reamping any better or worse? Please explain?

You guys are killin' me with this, I swear!

Steve

Dear Steve,

Please quit it with all this silly bullshit and heat up your soldering iron. NAMM is 5 weeks away and counting.

Thank You,

Randy

I'm actually responding to all this and soldering at the same time. So there.

Steve

There are a decent amount of good albums that have come out since the mid 90's re-amp craze from the bands I like but listen to the guitar tones on AIC for example or even Metallica. They are nowhere near as awesome as they were pre re-amping.

 

[glassjaw7]

C'mon guys! Let's quit arguing about stupid nonsensical(wtf, is that even a word ) shit and watch these kick arse videos!!!!!
Greg, your services will definitely be needed for these guys!

vvvvvv0:30 seconds-it's his camera causing the hum to come from his Bugera, not the amp itself!!! 2:58 Listen to my fuckin low E BITCHES!!!

 

[lolzgreg]

Behold the Arctopus is actually a kick ass band. That video doesn't do them justice, esp. without a drummer.

 

[Anonymous]

I understand what re-amping is and I am aware they do it a lot now but if its so great why are rock-metal records recorded before the mid-90s reamping craze sounding so much better?.

Maybe you just prefer the sound of the rock-metal records recorded before the "mid-90s reamping craze", ever think of that? I certainly do, but I also realize that it has nothing to do with reamping. I can play you stuff I've reamped that sounds nothing like a mid-90s rock-metal production and sounds identical to other clips I recorded via mic'd cab straight from my broken fingers.

I may not be able to tell the diffrence but it really is not a superior recording method IMO.

I don't get it man. If you can't tell the difference between two clips - one reamped, one not - and you like the guitar tone, then how is reamping any better or worse? Please explain?

You guys are killin' me with this, I swear!

Steve

Dear Steve,

Please quit it with all this silly bullshit and heat up your soldering iron. NAMM is 5 weeks away and counting.

Thank You,

Randy

I'm actually responding to all this and soldering at the same time. So there.

Steve

There are a decent amount of good albums that have come out since the mid 90's re-amp craze from the bands I like but listen to the guitar tones on AIC for example or even Metallica. They are nowhere near as awesome as they were pre re-amping.

Whatever man - you're not addressing my point - reamping is not responsible for you not liking the tones... I've made my point enough. I'm done now... time to move on.

Steve