Does Reamping Affect your Tone? Comparison inside.

  • Thread starter Thread starter lolzgreg
  • Start date Start date
James Lugo":1uqai005 said:
To me reamping effects the playing so much. I have people come in and reamp using my amp collection and you can hear the lack of connection with what the amp is doing.

James, I have no where near the experience you do, but 90% of the time, a player who is recording is using some vehicle for their tonal reproduction that they are comfortable with. It really just comes down to finding the amplifier that reacts best with their playing. Pinch harmonics stand out to me most in this scenario. I had a player that did pinch harmonics that sounded weak on a Rectifier but astounding on a 5150. You just need to find the right amp for the job. I would actually LOVE to do some free reamps for some of your work, even if you didn't use them. PM me if you're interested.
 
prsdiezel":167usuwk said:
dawnofdreamx97":167usuwk said:
James Lugo":167usuwk said:
To me reamping effects the playing so much. I have people come in and reamp using my amp collection and you can hear the lack of connection with what the amp is doing.


couldn't have said it better myself James... alot of people track with pod's or software and send it to get reamped, at the end of the day YES tone is in the hands, but you play and dig in a little differently with each amp, I like reamping as a production tool but i still like tracking to tape with my SOUND.... :rock:


See thats the problem. They bring a guitar signal un-preamped from there USB mic into there untuned guitar into there laptop.

"Hey can you reamp this threw your Diezel."

"and yes,.. I'm struming all my parts."

The most important part about reamping is having a "PURE" guitar signal source too reamp with.


100% must have the DI clean unaffected signal ...wont work otherwise... I prefer Countryman Type 85 di's they work great...Radial jdi is cool if you like some color...
 
glassjaw7":5hu3h4gw said:
Digital recording is actually a more accurate representation of the audio source being recorded. Analog tape actually adds compression which is why many people like the sound better.
Stephen, it's cool that you have the option to use either.

Well that is some what questionable with things like aliasing distortion, quantization noise, overload conditions and dynamic range.

It is the saturation, compression and distortion added by my old Sony 1/4 that I like adding to the sound. The simulation of these things do not sound the same.

I must admit I like results lolzgreg gets.
 
stephen sawall":2dli7lkb said:
glassjaw7":2dli7lkb said:
Digital recording is actually a more accurate representation of the audio source being recorded. Analog tape actually adds compression which is why many people like the sound better.
Stephen, it's cool that you have the option to use either.

Well that is some what questionable with things like aliasing distortion, quantization noise, overload conditions and dynamic range.

It is the saturation, compression and distortion added by my old Sony 1/4 that I like adding to the sound. The simulation of these things do not sound the same.

I must admit I like results lolzgreg gets.
I agree. I've heard some plug-ins that try to emulate the analog compression sound and they sound good, but not the same as the real deal.
I was just pointing out that digital recording doesn't color the sound of the recording as many people think it does; it actually colors it less in some applications. But that is only if it's done right, as you know. You have more recording experience than I do, I'm sure.
 
stephen sawall":2tmddc98 said:
glassjaw7":2tmddc98 said:
Digital recording is actually a more accurate representation of the audio source being recorded. Analog tape actually adds compression which is why many people like the sound better.
Stephen, it's cool that you have the option to use either.

Well that is some what questionable with things like aliasing distortion, quantization noise, overload conditions and dynamic range.

It is the saturation, compression and distortion added by my old Sony 1/4 that I like adding to the sound. The simulation of these things do not sound the same.

I must admit I like results lolzgreg gets.

Thank you, Steven. You seem quite knowledgable in this whole ordeal. Do you have some samples of your own work?
 
dawnofdreamx97":w2os4zjx said:
100% must have the DI clean unaffected signal ...wont work otherwise... I prefer Countryman Type 85 di's they work great...Radial jdi is cool if you like some color...

I use the Countryman myself. They're fantastic. It really comes down to recording at the proper volume to maximize SNR (which I have no audible raise in the noise floor when I reamp, thank god), using a super transparent preamp, and having great AD/DA converters.
 
lolzgreg":g0sm7zxp said:
stephen sawall":g0sm7zxp said:
glassjaw7":g0sm7zxp said:
Digital recording is actually a more accurate representation of the audio source being recorded. Analog tape actually adds compression which is why many people like the sound better.
Stephen, it's cool that you have the option to use either.

Well that is some what questionable with things like aliasing distortion, quantization noise, overload conditions and dynamic range.

It is the saturation, compression and distortion added by my old Sony 1/4 that I like adding to the sound. The simulation of these things do not sound the same.

I must admit I like results lolzgreg gets.

Thank you, Steven. You seem quite knowledgabl in this whole ordeal. Do you have some samples of your own work?

Yes I do .... but there is some question of ownership of the material. So till that is resolved I do not post any of it. The older stuff I am not sure where it is around here or storage.
I just talked with a friend last night who owns his studio and plan on going down and messing around a bit. I well be posting some of that.
 
James Lugo":d1k3p85w said:
To me reamping effects the playing so much. I have people come in and reamp using my amp collection and you can hear the lack of connection with what the amp is doing.

I posted this same opinion a couple months ago in another reamping thread. I think the performance can suffer if the player is not getting the exact tone they are looking for while cutting the track. At least that is what it would do for me. That being said, if reamping helps out the overall mix, then by all means, go for it. :thumbsup:

As far as the tracks posted by Greg goes, I like them both and think the tone is really good. The first one sounds more natural to me and the second one definitely has less low end with makes it tighter. If the question is "does reamping affect your tone?" then I would have to say "yes" in this instance, as I can clearly hear a tonal difference between the two, but it is not necessarily a bad thing. The 2nd one would probably sit in a mix better. They both sound really good though. :thumbsup:
 
stephen sawall":2n98afaf said:
You have fans ?

Was that even needed? I wasn't saying it in the aspect of "oh hey look at me I am some blah blah guitar player and I am awesome." I was just saying. I respect your opinion. Obviously you took mine the wrong way. I think this arguement is whack is all I am saying. I am not saying who is right and who is wrong bc honestly there is no right and wrong and there ya go.

But yes, I would say my bands have fans. I would also say anyone who is on here who is in a band has fans.
 
K Odell":3atrnnw3 said:
Was that even needed? I wasn't saying it in the aspect of "oh hey look at me I am some blah blah guitar player and I am awesome." I was just saying. I respect your opinion. Obviously you took mine the wrong way. I think this arguement is whack is all I am saying. I am not saying who is right and who is wrong bc honestly there is no right and wrong and there ya go.

But yes, I would say my bands have fans. I would also say anyone who is on here who is in a band has fans.

Sorry .....

I was just joking. I did not mean any harm or negative about you. I went back and edit it. I do not have any intent of offending others with a comment that goofy. I did not take your comment negative and / or mean for you too take mine that way either. I believe the statement is true about me .... to be honest. If your ever out here allow me to buy you a steak and beer or what you like .... so you can see what a goofy idiot I am.

ss
 
Ah dude you don't have to apologize. The internet sucks for putting across proper emotions into words. If anyone here is a retard its me haha.
 
K Odell":1c32fh2n said:
Ah dude you don't have to apologize. The internet sucks for putting across proper emotions into words. If anyone here is a retard its me haha.


It is too bad you can not see the intent of others with this form of communication. Peace to you and everyone else.

..... the steak and beer offer is open to everyone on Rig Talk.
 
As for the original question, I don't think anyone has said this yet...

It can if you want it to.

I do a bit of EQing before I send the guitar signal to the amp, get rid of some things that I don't want the amp seeing, so obviously in this instance the reamped signal will sound different than the bare tone through the amp. Reamping and using the proper equipment and techniques is recording an exact replica of the guitar's output tone to be sent out to the amp as if you were playing it live. The recording process adds nothing more than a time lapse. Any tonal coloring when using good equipment and techniques is minimal at best and no more significant than running your guitar tone through a stompbox.

Now saying that the guitarist will play differently when he hears his tone than when he hears something else, maybe. But get yourself a DI box that has a bypass output and run that to the amp so you can hear your tone and record the DI signal at the same time. Problem solved.
 
OK, I just listened to the clips...no difference to these old ears. :lol: :LOL:
 
There's a definite difference. While most may not be able to hear it, it's visible in the waveform.
 
Back
Top