Joe Satriani's SUPRISING take on Tube Amps vs Digital Modelling - A FRESH Perspective
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 чер 2024
- For my Presets visit: johnnathancordy.gumroad.com/ Hmm I read some stuff from @JoeSatriani which I hadn't heard articulated quite so clearly before. Also from the other perspective @AbasiConcepts recently made a switch in the studio away from plugins/modelling....
In the intro, I'm using "Jazz Chorus Amb" "Piezo Saver NY" and "Eric Lead" for HX stomp/Helix.
www.buymeacoffee.com/johnnath... - if you like what I do and
only if you wanted, you could buy me a coffee!
Get my PADs bundle here: www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr... (this folder will grow, and I'd encourage you to ask for different keys/songs and stuff that might suit this type of preset?)
I've decided to make it possible to grab both my Helix/HX Stomp bundles (the expression bundle with freeze presets has always been separate) together for £5 - www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr... - I will then email you a link to both bundles!
Try my general patches for Helix or HX Stomp in this bundle for £3 using this link - I will then send out the patches! www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
You can get my EXPRESSION patches in this bundle using this link - I will then send out the patches! www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
Try my patches for Pod GO for £3 using this link - I will then send out the patches! www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr...
/ johnnathancordy get my backing tracks here
www.buymeacoffee.com/johnnath... - if you like what I do and
only if you wanted, you could buy me a coffee!
00:00 Intro and Zoo
3:25 This surprised me a bit
4:44 Familiar?
5:12 It NEVER sounds the way it is
6:27 Tosin and Javier from Animals as Leaders
10:42 A Polar Bear analogy
The biggest problem with amps is that they sit on the floor, but your ears are 5-5.5' up in the air. So by standing in front of it the "mic" of your ears is wildly off-axis. Then you put a mic on it, it's virtually never that off-axis, that far away, etc.
Which I presume is why the 'full stack' was designed. You can definitely hear a sonic difference when the cab s 3 feet higher up; way more midrange.
I've been saying that for a while. Modeling is the sound of your amp in another room and you're in a control room. You want amp in room, use a difference monitoring source. I recorded for years with tube amps. I always sat in the room with the amp and was kind of let down by the sound after I went into the control room. I should have just sat in the control room with the amp head and dialed it in there. Modeling gives you that option, with way less weight and similar ease.
Plus, modeling saves your hearing.
@@ErebosGR And modeling saves money and allows you more options and to top it all off one more tube factory in Russia is closed to the outside world too.
Yes, amp in control room, including pedals, cab outside.
I’ve got big amps and a big room and I honestly can’t think of anything I love more than playing in that room, riding and manipulating the feedback and huge dynamics especially when I’m going wet/dry/wet but I do about 75% of my recording with my Kemper or at most a tube amp into an Ox. I’m not playing live but if I was I still love stage volume and clubs don’t mind so I’ll still choose tube amps for now if I do play live again. The new Neural plugins especially sound so damn good, you’re losing nothing sonically.
well it you know now, still tube?
Satriani has chopped and changed amps all the way through his career. He swore every one of them was the best for him at any given time. I'm guessing it's the same with his use of plugins/modelling. Sometimes we just need something different, and fresh to inspire us, whether it's actually 'better' or not. I've used all valve, all digital, and hybrid solutions, and it definitely keeps things interesting when swapping between them.
I have a strong feeling that as our tastes as players and listeners of music change, so too do our preferences on amplifiers and guitars and gear in general. Everything has its place.
And then start over..wow!.. distortion!(after acoustic)
Guitar players are never satisfied with their rig, hence the enormous amount of gear made available for them to purchase in their pursuit of that perfect set up. That is just how it is, and it will never ever change.
Great synopsis. I know the frustration Joe speaks of about dialing in a great amp sound and then listening back to the recorded track and being disappointed. That's what I like about modelers... no surprises. The tone and texture I'm hearing in my headphones is exactly what the recording deck captures. I almost feel like I'm somehow cheating sometimes, but a win is a win.
Yep. Consistency is worth a compromise sometimes (IMO it’s not that bad a compromise. I grew up on modeling and only play my friend’s tube stuff. I can’t have them where I live until I’m able to have a sound proof room).
You're right. I own a JCM800 and a JVM410. No treated room. Lewitt DM440. Peavey Revalver for 100$ as a plug-in is just 100% consistent, and you can dial in whatever you want if you invest a little time experimenting. The presets are immediately usable and beautiful. And you can tweak the parts (mod the amp) in the schematics. So there's that. Out with the 6L6GC's and in with the EL34's..... or whatever you want. 2200$ Marshall's and mic's take hours to set up, and if you bump the mic, sayonara to consistency.
The highlight of this video is the polar bear analogy! 😂 brilliant!
Its not often I go back and watch an intro tune again but that blew me away, beautiful tune , precise playing and excellent note choice , and amazing tone. I really enjoyed that thanks .
Absolutely spot on for me! A tube amp for me was always an experience in hearing it first hand. Every single time a listened to it in a control room either live or on playback, I was sorely disappointed. For me the modeller is the amp, the cab, the mic and then the desk. But done properly.
Hearing Satriani come to the same conclusion I have come to is refreshing. His thing being “if it can’t sound how it really sounds then start over in a new reality.”
For me, it was the experience of having to downsize to a small modeling practice amp, and also an historical realization: guitar amps were once primarily just a functional piece of equipment to ensure your guitar was heard over the band - that was it; over time, various designs with individual characters emerged - but imagine if Pete Townsend, for example, had access to today’s PA tech 50 years ago. He would have plugged straight in, as many early players had no effects and therefore used none, and viewed guitar as primarily a rhythm instrument. In other words, guitar players would do what many bassists do nowadays since the PA functions better than their bass amp to carry those frequencies.
Guitar is in a period where it may be reinvented again by a new generation unchained to the limitations of the equipment of the past - if you want to plug straight into a PA, you can; if you want to design a simulated amp head with 186 different power tubes running into an IR of an iphone speaker and play through that, you can - at this point you can do anything you want. And that’s the beauty of creativity and musical expression.
Intro sounds Nick Johnston inspired.
You’re one of the few channels that I actually sit and listen to their demo track. They are all so good.
We had an amazing amp modeler in the 80s. The ADA MP-1 was on many great albums of the time. Nuno’s tone on the “Pornagraffitti” album was awesome, and it was recorded with an MP-1.
I agree, having used modeling for front of house systems vs back line amps. I think the main difference is ear position rather than mike position. Instead of a dynamic mike directly in front of a cab, a condenser type mike overhead may give a more accurate sound to what you are hearing. Room ambience add a lot of nuances to tone and "feel". Otherwise, as suggested by Andrew, keep the head in the control room to tweak to the perfect tone in your head.
Thanks for this video. This was a great thing to hear and it helps how I feel about my gear. 😀
Beautiful opening composition. Always loved the major/minor modulation stuff
Very interesting points and from valid sources! I’ve used tube amps for years and have also recorded some stuff with modeling software and units. To me it’s always missing something in comparison to a live amp. Though I can’t wait till the tech figures this out as it would be so much better for workflow
Great discussion. I just got the captor x. I can't wait to experiment.
The best gear is what ever works for a specific task. Good for Mr Satriani for being real.
Amp sims can sound really really good and very convincing, especially in a mix, but at the end of the day it’s still a simulation. I’ve used a ton a different modelers, both cheap and expensive, and I’ve come full circle with my thinking on them. My conclusion is that real amps feel and sound better while playing, and that’s all that really matters. I never do this, but you can always split and capture the raw signal into a separate track and re-amp to your liking later. By the way, small low-powered tube amps (1-15 watts or so) sound amazing! I record everything from metal to country for myself and my clients through a Fender Bassbreaker 007 and I have always been thrilled with the result.
The amp in a room sound has lots of complexity between where you sand in relation to the amp, sound pressure, natural reverb, and delays as the sound bounces around. Amps never sound the same in recordings because mic’s don’t capture the room the way our ears do. Anyway, amp in room sound is impractical tone wise. When I switched from Mic’d amps to modellers I could barely tell a difference on records or live with in ear monitors.
Ooooh John 😍 I love this music you made.
Thanks very much for your thoughts. Good to hear different takes from very talented thoughtful players. I have need for both approaches. When playing at church modeling seems to work best (I use several of your HX Stomp sounds 😀). On stage with my crew I love amps with all the "challenges" that come with live sound. Cheers!
Thanks for reading out these 2 interesting perspectives. I am a big fan of Joe Satriani and it is very nice to see this perspective from him. Also big fan of you. Polar bear analogy rocks.
Came for the title, stayed for the intro- real nice playing. I've been eyeing up a lower model of the same range on your nylon string.
Yes!!!!!! That's the stuff. The opening was beautiful!!!!
I have been playing and recording electric guitars both live and in the studio since 1979 and have used modelers extensively for about the last 15 years. My problem I have with re-amping is, the sound I hear coming from the speakers, be it a real amp or a modeler through studio monitors, affects the way I play. There are subtle technical, tactile, execution, nuances that I may or may not use during the performance that are particularly chosen, in real time, as a result of what I hear coming from the speakers. I play differently through an amp than I do through a modeler. A re-amped performance will be different than one playing through a modeler or a real amp at the time of the performance. At least for me. I don't have a preference of one over the other. My point is that they are different.
It has been my experience that real amps and modelers do not give me the same experience when it comes to the sensitivity of what is coming off my fingers and what is coming out of the speakers. Modelers have gotten light years better than they used to be but, IMO they are not quite there yet when it comes to the tactile experience of a real amplifier. As for the sound of either medium, I have no problem with either of them. They both sound great. It's all about the feel/sensitivity of what I hear verses what's coming from the amp or modeler. As a player I may be the only one to notice the difference but I can hear it in my performances on playback.
I generally like the sound of a real amp miked up with quality microphones better than what I can get from a modeler but there are times when that is not the case.
Thank you! That's a great description - probably the words which my mind was looking for to explain my preference for tube amps. Especially with dynamics, the way we perceive the sound obviously informs how we play. I often hear the word 'reactivity' when people speak about tube amps, referring to the amps - maybe it's rather about us reacting and adjusting to the sound that travels back and tube (well, physical) amps might still 'feel' more natural, especially if you're used to playing live in different settings.
@@ChordYoga It took me quite a while to get used to playing through modelers when I first started using them. After using them exclusively for a few years it felt strange playing through a real amp and cabinet again. I have shifted back and forth so much now that I can adjust quickly.
My main point with the above remarks was that a re-amped performance would not be the same as one played by me directly to the track in real time due to the differences in the 'reactance' factor. That's a good term for it.
I love the ease of modeling software when recording. Been using Guitar Rig for years, and I recently got the PT-100 plugin, which absolutely kicks ass.
Interesting thoughts on a complex topic! I personally love the feel of playing in the same room with a nice amp.
I think the options available from recording your guitar DI and then reamping often just result in analysis paralysis. It's sort of freeing to simply commit a sound to tape/disk and not obsessing over the details as much.
Nice playing in your intro!
And importantly no one cares what it was recorded with if it sounds good😁
@@nickg2431 Truth!
Man...and I thought I was going crazy with my HX stomp thorugh my Catana Amp not sounding the same as Helix Plugin. What you are playing through can color so much. And it is so true Mics/Cabs/Room can also change the sound drastically. Thank you so much for posting this video.
PS: I wasn't even aware Satriani released a new album. I will check it out. His earlier album tone sounded great to my ears, but not so much on the latest albums.
When micing guitar amps people most often close mic, which is essential for live use (gotta defeat the feedback.) For studio recording, keeping a distance between the amp & mic can give the sound waves space to sound proper. Even more so when recording bass amps.
A 4x12 doesn’t focus until about 50’ away.
Related to your CG polar bear analogy, I remember reading about Sir Ian McKellen breaking down in tears on the set of The Hobbit at some point because he had to deliver his performance opposite to 13 stand-in photographs of the dwarves.
Your polar bear analogy was spot on! The blast of sound from a cranked tube amp does get the heart racing more than does a modeling amp at high volume.
I discovered Tech 21's SansAmp technology about a decade ago and it's been my go-to live setup ever since. Simply remarkable.
I 100 percent agree. I've been doing the same
Good point. It's not just recording either. I have a real tube amp that sounds great, but it's too loud at home. I put it through a Captor X, audio interface & PC & listen through studio monitors, and it doesn't sound better than my Helix or a good plugin. Either way they've both ended up all digital anyway.
Catching up on some missed videos during a busy time-wow, the intro piece to this one is fantastic! I love the lead tone; what patch is that? Loads of sustain, but still great clarity in that tone. Satch's comments about realizing that a mic'd amp doesn't sound like the amp in the room, and embracing a "new reality," reminds me a lot of what some *acoustic* guitarists were saying back in the 1990s. Acoustic guitar pickups were starting to sound okay then, but still nothing like what an acoustic guitar really sounds like. Some acoustic guitarists just said, "I give up trying to make my amplified acoustic sound like an acoustic; it's just a different instrument, and I'll try to embrace that new reality." Adrian Legg and Craig Chaquico come to mind as acoustic players who went down that road. -Tom
Love that hoodie!!! Great video!
I saw Satriani live once and his set was totally like the CD, I could just have put the CD on. He said himself later that he did not really like the set-up and went for a more raw live, less processing sound. Seems he's gone full circle, but thats just creativity, we all move on and strive for perfection.
Your polar bear analogy is spot on. The audience will experience the end result (the video). It’s the performers that will experience the difference. As long as a quality performance is delivered, the tools are there to produce an end result of a top-drawer timbre, be it via the real-world (microphone placement etc) or plugins/modellers.
I recently purchased the Boss-IR 200 and am absolutely blown away by the tone. After telling myself since 2000 that I would never go digital, here I am.. In fact, the accessibility of this great pedal is so great I'm playing 7-9x times more than before with my tube amps. No joke. So there is definitely something to be said for that digital/IR/modeling world. But man, when I plugged into my tube amps after 5 or 6 weeks of digital, I'm blown away by the improvement in feel and expression between me and the amp, guitar, tubes and speakers. Nothing beats that. Now I say both are great.
Such an incredible way to articulate this, loved the polar bear cgi vs real example.
Great video. I find interesting that I commented I only used the analog SansAmp GT2 pedal for modeling, in your original video on this topic, and SansAmp is shown in a good light in this video. I think, in my opinion, that there are too many options in technology and people get bogged down by it. I had a sound engineer master some recordings of my band and it sounded like I was in the room at a live show...the sound quality was directly related to the engineer's ability, the type of speaker cables he used, and the type of speakers; I could have purchased a vehicle for the same cost of his cables and speakers.
The other consideration I have is that regardless of whether an amp is mic'ed or it's a plug-in, the end result is a digital file and that cannot be an exact capture of what one hears in a live situation. I wonder if a renaissance for analog tape recordings will ever become a thing...then back to DAT!😂😂😂
That intro was tasty!!! Ima have to listen to that on a repeat loop….
When it gets to the point that we are struggling to get our mic'd tube amps to sound like a modeler...
For me its all about efficiency. Understand the objective of your playing, and use the most efficient method to achieve that. If its just for you, being in the room with a tube amp, and your personal experience, then stick with your tube amp. If your objective is to to get the sound you want into the ears of others, then there is likely a far more efficient way with modeling.
Great playing and tone
The sound of an amp through a mic is what it is.and forever engineers always buttered it up
That sounded lovely.
Idea. Record all tracks at home using HX Stomp, along side a D.I. signal then go into a studio and re-amp every guitar track. Real amp vibe without spending extra money doing the recording
Luv this discussion....I have dear friend getting back into guitar and I encouraged him to look closely as Neural products as I have a few of them and love the consistency I can achieve live and in recording. I adore "real" tube lamps but find them much more difficult to achieve the same result and factoring the costs. I'll likely never own a Tone King Imperial MkII but man do I love the plug in. But alas I dont own a real high quality tube amp ...if I did I suppose I would explore every option to use it.
Whether it's a digital version or a real tube amp; it's kind of like different colors in your paint pallet. Which one works for you... which inspires you to play better and track the better performanc? In what little I've recorded my amps (they're small watt amps), they were in a different room and I messed around for hours until I got what I felt was a good representation at the monitors... Interesting video!
Really interesting and something I have been saying for a while so it's nice to have it kinda validated by someone like Joe. I love my tube amps but for recording, I don't think I would go back to using real amps, apart from with my UA OX, definitely not micing them anyway.
The other good takeaway is from this video is to always use CGI Polar bears when possible, thanks 😁
I am 50 and grew up with tube amps. Once I had children in a 2 bedroom apt I switched to modelling. It was ok but not what I was used to. Years later, now my set up is perfect with a hybrid rig. I lose nothing in the recording. I use an Axe Fx 3 with Synergy Preamps into a Power Station in self attenuating mode back into axe fx3 for IRs into either an FRFR or studio monitors. The self attenuating mode helps me to get power tube saturation that is fed by a tube preamp from the Synergy. The tone I dial in is exactly the tone on a recording. I get the real tube amp feel and the real tone in a recording. I shared this info with Steve Fryette of Fryette amps on a recent live stream. He loved the concept.
The “in the room” sound has a lot to do with reflections and large speakers pushing air that can often be felt physically. The reflections can be captured by a room mic (which not all engineers will use, especially in the 1980s-90s) but the monitors or headphones you listen back with will never sound exactly like your cranked guitar amp speakers. Also, as you mentioned, unless you are using a binaural mic, you are not recording the exact room sound that your ears are hearing.
At this point, modelers are so good that amp vs modeler is just one aesthetic choice among many (effects, strings, pickups, etc) to get the sound an artist is going for.
I glanced away right before you switched to the acoustic and was thinking you had gotten the K-line to sound like that. 😊
Having lugged a Randall 100W head/cab around from gig to gig in the '90's, I will happily stick with multi-effects units.
this just says to me that change is the major influence.
Insightful! I was just thinking about this topic on a related note; noise floor reduction and more immediate tonal 'control' during recording when it comes to a more exposed, electric guitar / tube amp sound. I've had experience with modeling devices since early on, and go back and forth, but mostly prefer tube amps for what I do. When recording with headphones, doesn't that solve most of the perceived discrepancy of the 'irl sound experience' (room sound) vs. the recorded result, e.g. close enough to work with it and approximate? Since every recording is just a translation of the sound you're hearing in the moment -
I’ve managed to see Satch live a few times, and his live tone is heaps better than the studio recordings. I dare say his tone is the best of the other 2 players in the G3 jams, even though his sound sometimes gets overpowered by Steve Vai’s lol
I agree. I saw G3 with Paul Gilbert and petrucci. Although not the best player in my opinion Satch had the best tone.
I wonder why that is for a lot of albums. All the way across the pond, in a totally different genre, we have the Japanese metal band Babymetal where a similar thing happened. Love them or hate them, the live tone of their band from 2015-2017 was absolutely godlike and on a whole different level compared to the studio recordings, and from 2016 onwards the guitarists were playing through Kempers, couldn't tell the difference at all except for visually seeing a Kemper head instead of a JCM. The live sound difference was obviously because their live band consisted of different players than were on the recording, but still highlighting the difference between studio VS live sound. Studio recordings will rarely be as untouched as just hearing the guitars live.
You had me at hello,LOL. Nice intro tune bro
This is all filtered through the experience of recording an album or listening to a track. When you were in the same room, and the feel of a tube amp comes into play. That feeling can be extremely inspirational and bring out some great improvisation. Plug-ins have sound but no feel.
I think the word that comes to my mind is consistency. As Tosin pointed out, when they had the expensive studio time, it didn't sound quite right. But, then in the less expensive studio things clicked. I believe the advantage to modelers is consistency. If you're in a time crunch to record and your options are between a sound that might be amazing, or terrible vs something that will behave exactly as expected, then it's understandable why some artists might go with the modeler option. "That" sound will always be "that" sound. I believe one day modelers will capture that magic of the in the room sound, while at the same time providing consistency.
Politely I’ve understood this for years. I started working with the original zoom 20/20 units. Amps sound great in a room with you.With a modeller if you know how to get it sounding good it will sound the same every time everywhere and with no “ performance anxiety “😁
The "debate" rages on. If it sounds good, it's good. I don't record with my tube amp - I use Helix. Um, except every once in a while, when I record my tube amp because it does sound great.
Great video. Very thoughtful. I love a good tube amp as much as any player, and I've owned many since the 80s, from Marshalls to Boogies to Fenders and too many other brands to name. I've also been a fan of good solid-state systems and feel that solid state has finally arrived. If you want more consistency, reliability and versatility, modeling is the way to go. Let's just be honest here, and I know tube fetishists are not going to want to hear this, but here goes everything: tube amps are turning into furniture. As for miking amps, it's becoming a lost art as studios are more focused on plugins. You could go to a studio these days and not see an amp in sight. Another thing to consider is that the guitar heroes of today are very open to modeling/profiling systems, from DSP, Fractal, Kemper, Helix, Headrush and Boss GT-1000. There's no good reason to ignore this technology.
Good thoughts. Thanks for the video. I guess it comes down to: "What serves the song in your own mind?" And that is probably not an absolute. It's just whatever works for the artist or producer.
You could emanate a basic sine wave from a big square vs a volleyball shaped thing and it would sound totally different
Then make the materials different
Then make them multiple materials and dimensions and shapes and effective resonance/reflectivity
Then put them in different rooms with the same stack of complexities
Then realize the best tones of far more complex sounds (than a sine wave) had all those “in room” layers synergizing, in addition to the entire rest of the (out room) signal/recording/edit/mastering chain. This is part of why listening to eruption or “it’s so easy” is so captivating.
Modelers can’t get enough wrong to get enough right - once in a while - and amount to epicness. Their consistency is a ceiling (most of us won’t hit anyway, but the few who would are too great a loss IMO)
I spent a lot of time and money building a custom guitar cabinet specifically for recording. It sounds great! And yet I haven't mic'ed it up in ten years because modelers are so close, that the last 1% difference or whatever it is that a real amp makes is just not worth the trouble to me.
Dude. That CGI polar bear analogy is the best thing on the internet so far. 🤘🤩🤘
In a world of guitar players all sounding the same you don't sir.. very tasty playing new sub!!
Tasty intro, bud!
The fit on this video is on point
I love my Marshalls and we have always recorded basic tracks live with everyone, amps and drums in the same room with only baffles separating everything. Of course there is bleed through but that is part of the sound and it’s the only way to create that live feeling; this is the only scenario where using real amps would be superior to modelers but it requires an engineer with good ears to get that “in the room” sound to tape.
If you’re going to put your cabinets in a different room and track while sitting in the control room, use a modeler, the sound will be close enough and no one will ever know it’s not a real amp
@@ExpatZ266 it’s not literally tape dude just like album or cd now just means an artists latest release not necessarily the actual medium. Why bother, because playing live with other people is making music not assembling sounds
I think it’s up to the moment and people involved. B.B. King used a solid state amp for quite a while. I have used solid state for most of my guitar playing life. I did buy a tube pedal for distortion, but When gigging around Memphis in the 90s it all of a sudden became a thing, because a lot of players were wagging around their amps. Not busting tubes and saving our backs were a good thing. The tone is in the fingers. Always has been.
I play in a church with a silent stage, lousy in house PA and soundboard, but top notch livestream. On our livestream, my HX Stomp with a few Strymon pedals sounds IDENTICAL to the recording I'm trying to emulate. In dialing in my tone (using studio headphones), at home, at rehearsal, in the room live, and the stream all have an identical patch built...and sound very different. They're close, but the differences are enough that I've had to make sure I'm working with very carefully constructed gain structures and low output pickups so I'm not clipping one space and not another.
And none of those sound as good as me just plugging a drive pedal into my Marshall and cranking it at rehearsal.
On many songs, it is feel when it comes to real amps vs. a model. There are some songs I just can't play well with a modeler, but when I switch to an amp in the room I can nail it. Never thought that would be the case but after some back and forth it seems like a very real issue for me.
You should do a video someday if you feel the same about playing with a drummer playing an e-kit or drum machine. Those both can sound great and fit in certain musical styles more so than others (same I’d say with amp modelers).
polar bears as analogy to digital modelling love it 😀
Very interesting. I just bought Satriani’s new album. First I’d bought something from him in decades. His tone and playing seem to have more fire.
Big time Nick Johnston vibes on the intro track, loved it!
I enjoyed the Polar Bear analogy, but you missed a great opportunity at the end of the Duck Segment to have a digital Polar Bear suddenly jump out towards the screen. That would have really hit home. 🤭
Getting back to tone, that's what musicians generally chase. Some chase guitars, amps, mics, gear, hoping to catch tone. Modelers give us new tools to directly go after tone in more precise ways, but every tool has it's limitations, as well as the things it can do better than the original.
I liked the observation about tone in the low-mids being better on real Amps. This is particularly true on low gain distortion, and is what I think makes Boutique Amps and some vintage Distortion Pedals so desirable. But, then Line 6 Helix introduced the Ventoux Amp in the latest Update, and nailed that tone! Whatever Adrian at Line 6 did, he figured out how to do it on a Modeler. Please give us more of that! 🙏👍👌😎
Also, I generally don't like the hyped highs of Modelers. This is an an "artifact" of improved technology, but not of improved aesthetic sensibilities in my opinion.
Cool and interesting video👍. I think the penny dropped for me fairly recently with plugins versus real amps and I've just picked up Amplitube 5, Neural DSP's Soldano and Plini modules, and Amped ML's Humble (Dumble), and the sounds you can get from all of these are excellent and very inspiring in my opinion not to mention being easy to tweak and of course save. I think decent digital modelling that rivals physical amps has arrived at last!
If it gets you excited and works for your ears, doesn't matter if it's gorilla.. it's gold.
Not sure if it was in that same interview, but Joe also talked about the difference of dynamic range of tube amps vs. modelers. Some older modelers only had a few dB of dynamic range (not sure what the spec is on the Helix), vs. real amps which have likely a lot more. He also talks about use cases: big tube amps like Marshalls have to be turned up to 100+ dB to reach their sweet spot, because that's how they're designed. Joe can coax them into fully controllable feedback as part of songs that he uses constantly, and that's why he still prefers to use amps on stage. But for recording, it seems like anything goes.
For recording you have options . I wonder how this will sound , let’s try this or that. It’s all about creating.
It’s really how the player feels/hears it because I’m pretty sure the audience can’t discern or even cares whether we’re using plugins or real amps. I know us guitar players get picky and with good reason, but at the end of the day connecting with the audience and making great songs are what counts. I primarily use plugins mainly due to budget and convenience, mind you, I don’t play rock or metal so my tones are mostly clean. I remember once I sent some songs to be mixed and the engineer thought the guitars were all tracked with a real amp.
i think nothing beats the feel and breakup of a real tube amp. the question is which mics are used for recording, which mic preamps, which cables and how long are they etc.
properly set up, the real amp records better by a mile. well, a small downside: you might end up broke...
I never understood the mystic of the whole amp in the room. I always personally prefer a mic'd guitar sound because that is what i go for from listening to records. Plus micing up a guitar amp hones in on the particular frequencies that i want from the amp. I think the silly thing is dialing the amp in the live room and then checking it in the control room. Should just dial the amp in the control room from the start that way no bias for the room tone. I feel like we could actually capture the sound in the room closely but it wouldn't be practical in the context of a mix. Just imagine the amount of mics just for the guitar tone.
I love the sound of my valve amps in the room, however for recording I use whatever sounds right in the mix. I will point out though (in my opinion), that with regards to recording, I always prefer a digital polar bear. Much less mauling involved!
ok...correct me if I am wrong, how loud the amp in the room is also can effect how we perceive tone? I think this is one reason, I do not crank up my Studio Monitors while recording. Playing thorough a cranked amp vs studio monitors are day and night difference to me.
I have the Soldano SLO30 amp and absolutely love it, but when it came time to record my new record I used the Neural DSP Soldano plugin for most of the recording. It was convenient and actually sounds very nice. Do I want to use a plugin or amp modeler for my everyday playing and live performances, No! That's just my decision after having the experience of using both sides of this technology. I just think of all these options as tools for the trade.
So you opted for laziness
@@ragebait988
lol
@@ragebait988 The real question is though :If he told you he recorded his album with an actual soldano and you listened to it...would you be able to tell he is lying if no other feedback was given?Cause ultimately thats the measuring stick for everything.....he can use whatever he wants to record....if you cant differentiate between real and modelling then it doesnt matter what it was used in the first place since its GOOD ENOUGH TO CONVINCE you...
I started using modelers in 2003 when I found a Line 6 Original Pod 2.0 in a pawn shop for $45.00. I also had a bigass & very loud Sovtek tube amp, which had nothing but one channel , and no master volume. That thing sounded murderous with a fat nasty distortion stomper pushing the amp front end. I loved that amp, but I could only use it In live
gigs because it was just too damn loud.
That POD changed everything. I could record some surprisingly good tones straight to tape or DAW, then go out live and get the _exact same tone, night after night_ , by running two cables straight to the mixing board, one panned hard left, the other hard right, EQ just flat, and it sounded great.
Fast forward to 2019, when I got a Line 6 (yeah. I'm one of those sentimental fools who falls in love with some company's amp/guitar/modeler/stomp box, and thereafter stays loyal to that company. I do this because I adhere to the ancient but ever-valid engineering maxim:
_IF IT AIN'T BROKE, DON'T FIX IT!_
The Helix gives me everything I need, for live or studio. I create all my own tones and effects using the Helix with an A.R.T. EXTREME distortion pedal that doesn't even go thru the effects loop. I just hit the input of the Helix with the EXTREME, and it sounds dead on like I'm slamming the input of a gnarly 100 watt Soldano or something . Just _stoopit_
fat, beefy tone. Basically I have a main amp in the Helix which I use just as if I were running into the real amp, and I get all my various sounds by using different settings on that amp, which is that original Peavey 5150 100 watt head. I have loved that amp since the first time I plugged into one, and on the Helix it is my go to amp.
My approach may be a bit over the top old-school, but by treating the Helix as if it is a 5150 100:watt amp run hardpan left into a marshall 4×12 straight face cab with 25 watt greenbacks, using a ribbon mjc set about 2.5 inches back from the speaker, and a Soldano 4×12 cab, hardpan right and another ribbon mic, only set back 3.5 inches instead of 2.5, I get tones that crush! Using the Helix version of the 5150 just like it was the actual stack sitting there with my cord hanging out of it, that does away with the biggest complaint I've heard regarding modelers, which is that they sound great but take all the individuality out of a guitarist's sound. There is some validity to this complaint, because people tend to use Helix and Kemper and Axe as if they are contractually bound to use every amp & speaker & stompbox modeled in the thing! During one hour and a half show, I have seen some guitarists change their settings so often that there is simply no tonal continuity and no core tone that becomes their personal sound.
I know this was a long comment, but I have come to feel strongly about this, as I constantly hear guitarists of all types claiming that Helix takes away their individuality.
Not for me it doesn't. Once I realized that I needed to approach Helix like I approached my Laney (but still availing myself of all the effects goodies in the Helix), I found that that Evil Amp Usurping Modeler 😅🤣 actually helped me not only to nail down my own personal tone, but to save it so that I can use it everywhere at will, that whole 'faceless generic guitar modeler sound' went away forever.
Helix slso saved me from something I hate, which is re-amping. I'm not criticizing re amping for anyone but me (I think Joe Satriani's exquisite tones on _Martian Elephants_ -or whatever the name of his new release is🤣🎸💥-speak eloquently for the possibilities re-amping can offer). Re-amping doesn't work for me. I need to hear that glorious tone as I'm playing it and laying it on a track. Somehow that makes my playing come alive and begin to breathe fire. I find that the Helix enables me to avoid two common recording blunders, which are _we can always fix it in the mix_
and The Moron Theory--you know, _we can always put MORE ON!_
One last thought. It may well be that the reason Helix works so well for me is that I do not give one supersonic shit whether or not my virtual 5150 _sounds just like the real tube 5150 Peavey 100 watt head_ , I mean I literally do not care. I care that I get the sound I hear in my head outta the thing. The approach I described here is how I make it work for me (along with never using the factory presets. I dial in my own snapshots. Factory presets, even Line 6's presets, are good only for going, "wow they got 4 amps, 12 speaker cabs, 10 mics, and 3,689 stomp boxes _all on one bank!")_
"Use the modeler organically like you do your amps," is what I told myself. Seems to work for me.
The live listening experience varies per venue and equipment used. In ears reduces the number of variables both the artists and the consumer have to contend with. The artists who is aiming at producing a product for consumptions must take the consumer sensitives to heart.
The polar bear analogy has made my day - as someone who predominantly plays guitars and loves the way they sound and make you feel in the room, rather than records them, I feel justified in sticking to my old polar bear
This actually explains a lot.
I didn’t like the tone on his track “Sahara”. The high gain parts sounded really buzzy and compressed. The cleans weren’t so bad.
Haven’t got to the talking, but gorgeous playing in that first section! 👍👍
Real amplifiers and modeling amplifiers are just tools, don’t limit yourself to one or the other.
I purchased my first tube amplifier back in 1976 (a brand new Fender Twin Reverb), so I naturally lean towards tube amplifiers.
That said, modeling amplifiers do have a time and place for them to take advantage of.
Great content, thank you.
Twin reverb fender wow! top of the range legendary amp ask Zak does great reviews..suits his old maple neck tele
Bloody pricey.
tho...
Gotta give yourself a chance...pity we all can't..
We all deserve the best of everything in my utopia!
Twin reverb fender wow! top of the range legendary amp ask Zak does great reviews..suits his old maple neck tele
Bloody pricey.
tho...
Gotta give yourself a chance...pity we all can't..
We all deserve the best of everything in my utopia!
Seals in the zoo: Majestic water puppies
Seals popping up next to you in the ocean: Terrifying
I was a tube loyalist until I got the Cory wong plug-in. I worked night shift so I wanted headphones and was blown away. Takes pedals and he made me play more! Don’t annoy anyone when I get my smoke on the water on.
When microphone tech and recording tech catches up with how we actually hear, modeling tech will be right behind or even ahead, that is when real amps of any sort will be optional. That extra little something from a real amp vs modeling is mainly because the way we hear. Now if we take a tube amp, a modeller, a wireless, and a switcher, run the modeller through an amplified source, it'll likely sound indistinguishable from the tube at a distance. Dialing the real amp and modeller to sound the same vs same dial positions. So to sum up, mics don't catch what we hear, and what we hear affects the way we play, be it in the room, remotely, or direct then reamping. There will always be a difference.
After 35 years of guitar playing with many different equipment sets, it all comes to how good it feels when you listen to the album, doesn't matter what instrument you used. Digital world is improved above my expectations, so, seems Satriani knows that, too.
And that's something fresh.
Whichever way you go the holy grail of tone is a moving target. However in the digital world at least you can easily store a sound and come back to it later. Whether your ears hear it the same the next day is another subject.
"Whether your ears hear it the same the next day is another subject." I felt that.
Its also about feel, not just sound. They have the sound dialed in pretty well but I have yet to play on a digital amp that reacts like a tube amp under my hands...