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

[harddriver]

Yes my 68 and 69 Plexi's sound quite like EVH's rig and they are more dynamic, raw and pissed off sounding that what I hear in the Kemper clip. I may not play like him but the amp attributes are there, quite a few clips of people copping the amp tone fairly well even without EVH's fingers.

So since you won't actually answer the original question directly then I have to infer that in your opinion the only reason the Kemper does not sound more dynamic, raw and alive is because the Aussie guitar player is not EVH........ you are intentionally trying to obfuscate the original question with non issues.

Please post your personal clip of your EVH tone with your AXEFX or Kemper.

I would imagine it's alot easier to get the full mixed album tone with the Kemper because of the Sunset sound reverb and delay options, if I were playing a show that is trying to emulate the actual album tone I would do it that way unless you want to do the whole slave W/D/W thing, then you better play at the level of Al Estrada and know how to get the tone.

Here's Al Estrada with a Suhr SL68 slave to a Matrix GT1000FX

Here's my 69 SL straight in with no slaving no reverb or delay.

Here's my 68 plexi slaved into a 72 SL

 

[cardinal]

I've had a legit '69 plexi-panel 1959 Superlead and it didn't sound like that either. Where does that leave this silly debate?

 

[BatmansRigTalk]

Good post. This yang

It's fascinating that you're arguing tonal differences between modeling and tubes, yet when you call out the differences in tone between a 5153 and a Plexi, you point to the power tubes as the difference maker. In reality, the pre-amp section of those amps are where the greatest difference is. 6L6 vs EL34 is quite subtle and is really only distinguishable at high volumes. You come accross as knowledgeable on the modeler side for sure, but my guess is you're quite inexperienced when it comes to tube amps. Yes or No? Maybe you've never experienced what the response of a tube amp feels like? I don't know.

The "sound" of the modelers is certainly there. The feeling, through a 4x12 with volume? Nope. Playing through headphones at night while my kid sleeps? Hell ya. Recording? Absolutely. Moving my pant legs, getting feedback and feeling the amp naturally squish/sag due to the tubes running hot? Nope. Just isn't the same.

Throw up a YT vid and most if not anybody at all will truly know the difference. Get in a room with a guitar and cab I think most would feel a difference.

The point about the EvH 5150III (which I own) is that it is almost a completely different amp to a Marshall Plexi but could be configured to produce a very similtar tone. That he wasn't dependent on a Plexi. That he could use different gear to get there. A Kemper is just different gear that can also get there to the point blind testing fools people. The 4x12 thing is because guitar cabs are directional while FRFR is not. In fact guitar cabs are not a very optimal way to disperse guitar sound at all. Otherwise monitors would be like guitar cabs.

 

[psychodave]

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.

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.

You have lost all credibility and have extremely poor reading comprehension. I never mentioned or referenced what was being used in the video from Australia... although you can clearly see that there is an amp called a Warsha in the video. However, to reiterate... I said the original shitty recordings sound way better than that video from the guys in Australia. Have a nice day

For the record, that video doesn’t show a “real deal” Plexi. I’ve owned a real deal 1967 Plexi for 30 years and know what they are and how they sound.

 

[Donnie B.]

A Kemper is just different gear that can also get there to the point blind testing fools people.

I don't think a single person has debated this point.
That fact alone does not equate to digital = the exact same thing.

 

[Donnie B.]

For the record, that video doesn’t show a “real deal” Plexi. I’ve owned a real deal 1967 Plexi for 30 years and know what they are and how they sound.

Owned a 2009 Germino Lead 55LV for a while.

 

[BatmansRigTalk]

You have lost all credibility and have extremely poor reading comprehension. I never mentioned or referenced what was being used in the video from Australia... although you can clearly see that there is an amp called a Warsha in the video. However, to reiterate... I said the original shitty recordings sound way better than that video from the guys in Australia. Have a nice day

For the record, that video doesn’t show a “real deal” Plexi. I’ve owned a real deal 1967 Plexi for 30 years and know what they are and how they sound.

I don't think a single person has debated this point.
This fact alone does not equate to digital = the exact same thing.

Your examples had loads of confounding variables not to mention needed EvH to get there.

Like you know pull out one of the top 10 guitarists ever at the height of his career and then compare it to a tribute band and claim it proves Kemper can't recreate the real deal.

In no universe is that a logical comparison.

There are hundreds of videos of people profiling their own rigs and doing an ABY test by going between the two. That's all you need to look at to get how exact profiles can be.

 

[BatmansRigTalk]

I agree. Tone-wise, the modelers, if setup correctly, get there and are just a different available tool. "Feel" inspires me, so that's what I generally stick with aside from thre scenarios I mentioned above.

Yeah, I've never and i mean never heard a 5153 sound like a plexi. Maybe user error on my part . You missed my point. It's not about using a 4x12, it's the feel and amp squish that comes from cranking a tube amp. Solid state amps suck just as modelers do in this regard. You never directly answered my question about your experience with tube amps, but I guess you did in an indirect way. If this argument is truly logic based, both sides need to be equally represented. In this case, seems like your experience with real amps is lacking, therefore your opinion is invalid and clearly biased. Same can be said for those that haven't truly given modelers a thorough review. Bias is a bitch, especially when it comes to things like nostalgia or advancements in technology

I use both. I said this awhile back. I am addressing the OPs question. I think they were there 10 years ago. Go to a festival with over a hundred bands and look at how every other band uses a profiler and no one is complaining they are missing something.

Look at a Diezel VHX for an example of how even top valve rig designers know what profiling can do.

Some people here claim profilers can't emulate valves at all and never will. Sent their profilers back.

 

[kunos]

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

the real question here is do you really really think that posting a couple of clips... some from one of the greatest guitarist ever and one from a... tribute band, recorded in totally different ways will prove your point? ANY point?

Meanwhile bands with millions of budget to throw at the problem go around the world touring with fractal and kemper stuff... but yeah, that doesn't count because a tribute band doesn't sound like VH... infallible logic.

 

[narad]

Look at a Diezel VHX for an example of how even top valve rig designers know what profiling can do.

???
I think all amp companies know that digital is eating their sales?

 

[BatmansRigTalk]

???
I think all amp companies know that digital is eating their sales?

???
So make a more expensive hybrid valve digital amp that costs the most from their line?

How about because it sounds just the same if not better than their real ones.

 

[narad]

???
So make a more expensive hybrid valve digital amp that costs the most from their line?

How about because it sounds just the same if not better than their real ones.

The VHX isn't a hybrid digital amp. It's just a digitally controlled analog tube amp with digital effects. So in terms trying to further your argument using the VHX as an example, all the wrong things are circuits and tubes.

 

[BatmansRigTalk]

So in terms trying to further your argument using the VHX as an example, all the wrong things are circuits and tubes.

Hybrid valve digital amp. Notice I didn't say hybrid digital pre-amp valve power amp.

What do you think the IRs are all about? You get IR-enabled DI with 64 high-quality cabinet IRs with multiple mic/mic placement options.

They profiled cab configurations that work well with their amp. 64 of them.

Let's not forget the important 4x12 feel that somehow beats profilers according to some.

 

[Donnie B.]

Let's not forget the important 4x12 feel that somehow beats profilers according to some.

You know, most here are trying to have an adult conversation but you keep tossing out childish snipes like this 4x12 one.
What's your game? You probably don't even play much but instead read lots of internet stuff which you think makes you
an authority.

Or something like that.

I have an idea. You accept that some folks disagree with you and stop acting like a two year old not getting their way.

 

[narad]

Hybrid valve digital amp. Notice I didn't say hybrid digital pre-amp valve power amp.

What do you think the IRs are all about? You get IR-enabled DI with 64 high-quality cabinet IRs with multiple mic/mic placement options.

They profiled cab configurations that work well with their amp. 64 of them.

Let's not forget the important 4x12 feel that somehow beats profilers according to some.

Well I mean, we're in a thread titled "do you think modelers will get there..." and so I would have thought it hard to argue that a new valve amp is some how evidence that modelers have gotten there. If your focus in mentioning the VHX was on the IRs, I don't know how that furthers the point either, to be honest with you. The IR technology in the VHX is the same impulse response style that has been around for decades. So I mean, it's there, in as much as it "was there" back then.

 

[BatmansRigTalk]

You know, most here are trying to have an adult conversation but you keep tossing out childish snipes like this 4x12 one.
What's your game? You probably don't even play much but instead read lots of internet stuff which you think makes you
an authority.

Or something like that.

I have an idea. You accept that some folks disagree with you and stop acting like a two year old not getting their way.

I don't have to address you personally or try to insult you personally to make any points work. My points are objective, not subjective. They are measurable and quantifiable. I am also not making appeals to 'others' to make my points work. Either the point is capable of standing on its own merits or not.

The fact is you have spent pages trying to prove your point that profilers can't capture something magical about tube amps and still haven't been able to pinpoint anything about what that is exactly.

You ended up moving the goalposts to say it was a subjective thing. I said that was fine, however, you are making an objective claim that there is something physical they can't do. That is because your own claims about subjectivity just don't sit well with you. If you were comfortable with that you wouldn't be still trying to find what that thing is that profilers can't capture?

Saying dynamic, raw and pissed off are just subjective things. They don't actually say what the profiler can't do. The fact is you know as well as I do that profilers can probably do the thing you say they can't do if you go look hard enough or spend enough time on them to get there. This is really at the heart of the problem with people who claim they sent their profilers back. That.

I have used both valve and digital. I use real deal and pedals. I use profilers. I use IRs. I use real cabs. I am not the one trying to claim profilers can't do some job. That is your claim. This is because I bothered to spend time with them as I did all my other gear to find what I needed to do to make it work. The technology is there. Just put the work in. Simple as that.

Well I mean, we're in a thread titled "do you think modelers will get there..." and so I would have thought it hard to argue that a new valve amp is some how evidence that modelers have gotten there. If your focus in mentioning the VHX was on the IRs, I don't know how that furthers the point either, to be honest with you. The IR technology in the VHX is the same impulse response style that has been around for decades. So I mean, it's there, in as much as it "was there" back then.

How many valve amp models have IRs selected for and built into the valve amp itself? or IR ready? I'll name two. Revv D20 and Diezel VHX. If it is so common them can you name some more valve amp models that have done this? We shall be seeing plenty more brands do it in the future also. Matching IRs is very important when it comes to recreating tones. That is because a cab and microphone placement/selection is every bit as important as the amp driving them. A huge contribution to tone. Two Notes was pretty much the monopoly for this up until recently.

 

[narad]

How many valve amp models have IRs selected for and built into the valve amp itself? I'll name two. Revv D20 and Diezel VHX. If it is so common them can you name some more valve amp models that have done this? We shall be seeing plenty more brands do it in the future also. Matching IRs is very important when it comes to recreating tones. That is because a cab and microphone placement/selection is every bit as important as the amp driving them. A huge contribution to tone.

The Suhr PT15 and the Driftwood Darkest Nightmare also come to mind. Mesa has the cab clone in their newest amps, but not sure if IRs are stored. I'm sure many amps will come with this since it's usefulness vastly outweighs the cost of the technology at this point. But, what that has to do with amp modeling, I have no idea. While I personally believe that amp modeling is basically there (while maybe not consistently in a commercial product), amps with IRs sound like evidence of the exact opposite: we acknowledge players want the convenience of digital/direct devices so here's some IRs and a direct out, but when it comes to the amp tones, we're still going to give you valves.

 

[Donnie B.]

The fact is you have spent pages trying to prove your point that profilers can't capture something magical about tube amps and still haven't been able to pinpoint anything about what that is exactly.

YOU: Digital can 100% reproduce a tube amplifier.
OTHERS: They are really close but I still prefer tubes.
YOU: Then you aren't doing it right. Or it's just your imagination. AB TESTING PROVES IT!!!!!!!
OTHERS: No, I tried both platforms and simply prefer tubes. Modelers aren't the same for me.
YOU: Then you aren't doing it right. Or it's just your imagination. AB TESTING PROVES IT!!!!!!!

 

[Briman24]

Nope. I can hear difference everytime. (In person)

 

[BatmansRigTalk]

YOU: Digital can 100% reproduce a tube amplifier.
OTHERS: They are really close but I still prefer tubes.
YOU: Then you aren't doing it right. Or it's just your imagination. AB TESTING PROVES IT!!!!!!!
OTHERS: No, I tried both platforms and simply prefer tubes. Modelers aren't the same for me.
YOU: Then you aren't doing it right. Or it's just your imagination. AB TESTING PROVES IT!!!!!!!

Digital aliasing is still a problem to varying degrees with every commercially available modeler/profiler.
The processing hardware required to do an optimum job is simply not cost effective for any production unit.

Doesn't matter how good the sound engineer/programmer if he's working with limitations in processing
due to costs.

Here you are trying to find objective reasons why profilers can't do what valves can. You are actually saying the processing isn't good enough. So your caricature of this discussion omits you are most definitely trying to find what is physically wrong. You can't do that though. Which should tell you plenty about where the differences currently reside.

Hint: Not with the units.