Do you think modelers will get there in the next 10 years?

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
And in 2020 vinyl outsold CDs... Tube amps will never go away.
One reason why vinyls can sell better than CDs is because people with vinyl usually also have a way better equipment to play them through. Better amps and better speakers. CDs in car radios were a major selling point. MP3 for iPods. Vinyl is a home system or DJing. You can buy a lot of high end vinyl gear also. I buy vinyl over any other option because you get a big picture sleeve and the analogue sound of them playing but it's by no means better than CD which is already capable of more than human hearing can manage.

However the bottom line in all this is the claim that "valve amps can't be modelled faithfully" is just no longer the case, especially in 2021. It's already moving towards apps. Imagine phones capable of Kemper. Profiling with them. Wireless out to a bluetooth monitor.

Tube television is much more complex than a guitar amp and yet do we really believe that look can't be done with computer fx?

Or tube radio for that matter.

Or Atari games...
 

[ Donnie B. ]

Well-known member
So you will ALWAYS hear (and read) about people claiming their tube amps have quantum farting unicorns making love inside of them.

I know right? Why not just buy a single box that has 500 unique amps, 250 reverbs, 100 delays, 50 overdrives, 25 univibes, 5,000 IRs, and a dozen unicorns inside?

All 125% EXACT faithful copies of the originals. Because, well, it's just math.

uni.jpg


:ROFLMAO:
 
Last edited:

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
The idea the same model of valve amp or cab is 100% faithful to each unit of the same model is just not the case.

This should be evident to anyone dialing in their own amp when listening to what people advise them to dial in. Anyone with enough experience with valve amps and cabs and micing them should know by now that you will always have to tweak your own stuff to find its sweet spots. Sometimes you will have to completely use different values to what others recommend on their units. A row of valve stacks will also have variations in how they are dialed in not just to produce variations but to balance them with the same tone.

Has anyone noticed how their JCM800 doesn't sound like a JCM800 on some album or live? Or how their Mesa Boogie TripRec doesn't sound like the TripRec on some album or live? Or how their Marshall 4x12 creambacks don't sound the same on some album? If you haven't noticed this then one day you will come around. Electric guitar gear is like this and we are not even talking custom which is a whole other level of variation. Three custom Fender Tweeds and you pick which one you dig the most because they will all have subtle differences. Top artists and large recording studios have amp collections of the same models to help find that special one. Same with cabs. They aren't going to be Ebaying those either, ever. So when we go to buy a rig because it sounds like something we heard, then there will be some level of disappointment never exactly hitting the same thing because they are not even 100% faithful to each other.

Also, valve amp manufacturers don't even make this claim of 100% reproduction. They claim the amp with be voiced the same as some circuit design. That 'voiced' claim is much more variable than one may like to think because they are variable.

This is why profilers and IRs are sometimes even sounding better (more like what you want) than your own valve equivalent. The ability to profile and capture gear that no one else has is exactly why some profiles and IRs are so amazing in the first place. The studio or collector or artist just happened to have a really impressive unit to profile. Some amps don't even leave the recording studio they are so precious to a band's tone.

Not to mention a full range of various microphones that are valued in total more than your amp collection being used to profile cabs. Some ribbon mics are worth more than your custom guitar. Not to mention the variation in the same mic models.
 

[ Donnie B. ]

Well-known member
Has anyone noticed how their JCM800 doesn't sound like a JCM800 on some album or live? Or how their Mesa Boogie TripRec doesn't sound like the TripRec on some album or live? Or how their Marshall 4x12 creambacks don't sound the same on some album?

Did you know an entire generation of players were convinced that Jimmy Page on LZ1 was an LP into a Marshall?

I'm not sure the point you're trying to make. We're discussing the overall experience (not just the sound) of playing a particular tube amp vs. a digital recreation of the amp.

You seem to maintain that they are 100% alike because the science dictates they must be.
I, and others, disagree based on personal experience simply playing both options.
 

Smashedguitarist

Well-known member
I have little experience with this, but I can say that I used neural (fortin cali) for recording, and didn't like it or the omega gimmick as much as a real amp. I found the di on my amp into my interface and then twonotes cab sim is a pretty awesome tone and much better than the neural sims. But, it is kind of a pain in the ass to switch from recording to live sound because of the eq changes through my actual 4x12 (in as much as if you are going for actual best tone out of your rig). I am thinking hard on this neural dsp. It looks like it could be a great recording tool.
 
Last edited:

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
We're discussing the overall experience (not just the sound) of playing a particular tube amp vs. a digital recreation of the amp.

You seem to maintain that they are 100% alike because the science dictates they must be.
I, and others, disagree based on personal experience simply playing both options.

Read the title of the OP.

Do you think modelers will get there in the next 10 years?​


Plenty of times you have stated that profilers can't reproduce an amp model. People have been talking about sending profilers back because the sound was not the same as their amp/ the amp.

That is what I have been addressing in every one of my posts in response to that and the OP.

You have now moved your goal post to the amp 'experience' and not just the sounds they make. You have gone from the objective (the hardware) to the subjective (how you feel about your rig on any given day). If all the valve purists said that in the first place that wouldn't have been in question.

Objectively, the science behind sound engineering got there a decade ago. They are measurably the same sounds. You can quantify it. Subjectively you can decide you prefer one over the other. Which will be discovered through double-blind tests and the same person making that claim not getting it right. Hence it must be a subjective opinion and not an objective fact. The fact is they are there objectively.

Not only that but your valve is based on science also.
 
Last edited:

harddriver

Well-known member
I'm not sure the point you're trying to make. We're discussing the overall experience (not just the sound) of playing a particular tube amp vs. a digital recreation of the amp.

You seem to maintain that they are 100% alike because the science dictates they must be.
I, and others, disagree based on personal experience simply playing both options.
I think most of us here can and do acknowledge that audibly for recording and for the average listener the digital modeling sounds great and quite impressive on a lot of fronts these days versus the old line 6 stuff. I haven't seen one person here regarding digital amp modeling that is critiquing it without merit. Their conclusions are, the modeling seems to miss some of the experiential aspects for the guitar player themselves... pure and simple.

As Racerxrated/Donnie B/Pyshcodave and others have stated when a digital system provides all of the same experiential aspects which tube amps and amps in general provide then us traditionalist's will buy it. BatmansRT arguments center on how the digital model is 100% accurate right down to every aspect of the modeled tone and that may very well be and if you don't hear it to be 100% then you are a tube monger traditionalist who won't move on with the times and it's just not the case...he's arguing in perpetuity with most people who welcome advancement and embrace it, that's how thing evolve and get refined, with continued research and development.

Say you had an awesome vintage Les Paul that had the mojo with original PAF pickups that screamed. If those original PAF pickups were replaced with a modeling pickup that analyzed the sonic spectrum of the pickup to replicate it 100%. Would the player notice a difference regarding on how it interacts and interplays with his guitar playing experience? That's my last anecdote Batman all valid points have been made and yours have been duly noted.
 

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
BatmansRT arguments center on how the digital model is 100% accurate right down to every aspect of the modeled tone and that may very well be and if you don't hear it to be 100% then you are a tube monger traditionalist who won't move on with the times and it's just not the case...he's arguing in perpetuity with most people who welcome advancement and embrace it, that's how thing evolve and get refined, with continued research and development.
I use BOTH and even at the same time. 🚀 Just use an ABY.
 

harddriver

Well-known member
Real cranked plexi
Real cranked plexi/bandmasters
Kemper Modeler with plexi w/ VH1sunset sound album reverb delays

Which sounded the most raw pissed off alive? Be honest here, this should be interesting. The player is close to Ed abilities so strike that from the record please, tone and amp attributes only.
 

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
Real cranked plexi
Real cranked plexi/bandmasters
Kemper Modeler with plexi w/ VH1sunset sound album reverb delays

Which sounded the most raw pissed off alive? Be honest here, this should be interesting. The player is close to Ed abilities so strike that from the record please, tone and amp attributes only.
The original shitty recordings sound way better than that video from the guys in Australia.
So much for your claims, you know the difference between digital and real deals.

You didn't even realize there was a real deal Plexi also going on in the Australian video. :rolleyes:

How could you miss the Plexi half stack next to the Kemper?

You have pretty much proven my point that unless you are EvH with HIS Plexi/rig you are not going to sound like EvH with a Plexi just because you have a Plexi.

Nor will you actually know the difference between the real deal and not because you can't even distinguish the real deal with a real deal!

Apparently, the Australian Plexi did not sound so hot compared to the EvH's one, which sounds way better.

I wonder why? Could it have something to do with what I said here that you glossed over?

I said all along that golden ears get fooled in tests. I didn't even have to do a test to find golden ear claims even hoodwinking themselves.
 

harddriver

Well-known member
As you can see the Plexi input jacks on the front are not plugged into at all..... you can stare it all you like, he isn't plugged into the front end................ I read he was running the Kemper into an effect loop return on the plexi. The plexi is turned on though so the reamping claim might be true.
 

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
As you can see the Plexi input jacks on the front are not plugged into at all..... you can stare it all you like, he isn't plugged into the front end................ I read he was running the Kemper into an effect loop return on the plexi. The plexi is turned on though so the reamping claim might be true.
Of course, he is running it into the FX loop. It's called slaving. The most important section of any Marshall amp is the power stage. That's where the Marshall distortion tone comes about.
 

harddriver

Well-known member
Of course, he is running it into the FX loop. It's called slaving. The most important section of any Marshall amp is the power stage. That's where the Marshall distortion tone comes about.
Dude stop your anklebiting....As a guitar player answer the question....

What amp in those two clips sounds more pissed off, raw, dynamic and alive?

I have never said the tone of the Kemper sounds bad it doesn't have the dynamic response, cripsness or attack of the real amp when you put them side by side, it just doesn't to me and alot of other people, get over it. How many times does it have to be said that we all think it's a fantastic evolution and tool the fact they he can run an emulation of Sunset sound reverb and specific delays to cop the authentic album tone and effects it's quite remarkable, but the aforementioned statement still applies and will come down to personal preference.

Also if you notice.... and you probably didn't the Kemper must be mostly direct because in every instance where a tube amp would go into harmonic feedback at the end of Atomic Punk and others he had to pick a similar harmonic and fake it.
 
Last edited:

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
Dude stop your anklebiting....As a guitar player answer the question....

What amp in those two clips sound more pissed off, raw, dynamic and alive? I have never said the tone of the Kemper sounds bad it doesn't have the dynamic response or cripsness, and attack of the real amp, it just doesn't to me and alot of other people, get over it.

Also if you notice.... and you probably didn't the Kemper must be mostly direct because in every instance where a tube amp would go into harmonic feedback he had to pick a similar harmonic and fake it.
You can almost hear the condescension.
How about this. Play like EvH if you think owning a Plexi over a Kemper is such an important point of demarcation for dynamic response, crispness and attack. Walk the talk. Even EvH didn't use a Plexi for his modern shows. He used an EvH 5150III. Tonally a very different amp with 6L6s in it.

Chances are you won't be as good as EvH nor sound like him with your rig but there are people running profilers who can do it.

So Kemper can't do harmonic feedback?
 

harddriver

Well-known member
I'm still waiting for your answer to the question..........................

What amp in those two clips sounds more pissed off, raw, dynamic and alive?

It may do adequate feedback just fine, I think Victm5150 said it does by his account.... but it didn't do it every point where an amp would and should in the Kemper clip and the guy was trying to coax it out of it and needed to fake it.
 

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
Who sounds more raw and dynamic? The guy trying to be EvH or EvH?

EvH of course.

Therefore Plexi beats Kemper?

I can't even believe you think this is all logically sequential and that it necessarily follows through that way.
 

harddriver

Well-known member
..........stop the childish insinuations and answer the question...................................

For me yes the Plexi beats the Kemper and I have listed why I believe so. Answer the question?

Are you telling us that you can't evaluate just the characteristics of both amplifiers in those clips, I thought you had GOLDEN EARS?

That Aussie guy is a fantastic EVH player so that's not an issue....................
 
Last edited:

BatmansRigTalk

Active member
..........stop the childish insinuations and answer the question...................................

For me yes the Plexi beats the Kemper and I have listed why I believe so. Answer the question?

Are you telling us that you can't evaluate just the characteristics of both amplifiers in those clips, I thought you had GOLDEN EARS?

That Aussie guy is a fantastic EVH player so that's not an issue....................
I answered it already and explained why. It's EvH playing.

You won't answer me. Will you sound like him on your Plexi?

Also if the guy is such a fantastic EvH player then why doesn't he agree with you and not use the Kemper? Because you understand rigging out for the EvH brown tone more than him? Is that your claim?
 
Top