Exactly. Also, it is hard enough to even tell a difference between the two when a/b'd, but put it in a mix and you won't be able to tell, nevermind non-guitar people being able to tell the difference or even care. Supposedly there is a feel difference with the sag of a real amp vs a modeler. but I feel that you get used to what you play.
@@JDStone20 You are 100% correct. The difference is in the "feel" of a tube amp and how it reacts to your playing, especially for edge-of-breakup stuff. Problem is that many tube amps have to be run at loud volumes before you really experience that. You can learn to make a modeler work for you and you can replicate much of those subtle nuances with volume and a good speaker (headphones don't really work for that).
If it’s the tone you’re chasing, you’d play through a vintage or boutique tube amp. Hell, even a tweed pro junior will get you there. Modelling is a representation of tone
@@los_rubosIt’s a lot easier than figuring out how to touch the strings to make the amp react to create the desired sound. Studying manuals to find something is easier than spending time to find a way to physically touch the strings coordinating with the amp.
You trying to get even more people to hate me? I honestly couldn’t care less…bring it on John I will say it’s hardly surprising to me that even through a shitty load box and not even using a microphone, the pro still kicks the shit outta the other stuff…if you put a mic on that amp and then ran that mic through a nice Telefunken V76 or a nice API the way God Intended, the difference would even be waaaay more noticeable
I’ve read through the comments, the line from the pro Digital crowd seems to be “who cares I don’t hear a difference and if there is? Who gives a shit!” pretty much in line with what I would expect from that kind of talent level…a 16 to 30 year old demographic with that practised cynicism so common in this age range. Would you prefer sugar with your coffee or saccharine? Olive oil and balsamic on greens or corn oil and white vinegar? A Rolls-Royce and a Jaguar and a Ford Fiesta all do 75 mph on the way to Vegas. Which is the superior ride? Obviously the real amp and dedicated pedals are going to be better than any modler, if you’re happy with a Ford Fiesta ?…good for you, but don’t try to say that it’s as good as as a Rolls-Royce.
I can think of very few people who can really judge how right Tom is about what he says. I mean, come on guys, Mr. Tom Bukovac is not an idiot and if he says so, then he has his good reasons for it. I honestly don't understand how anyone can get upset about this. He just tells his opinion, tells it like it is and he gets a lot of backlash in return. It's a crazy world... ps: "....the way God Intended..." = The Almighty in his infinite wisdom surely intended for an amp to be miked and the signal then run through a V76 or API... This is great, Tom! I mean, after all, he is God, right? Love it...and love you, man 🤣
Thanks Tom for stating the FACTS! I’ve said the same thing for years - some people simply either don’t play in bands or record guitars in real pro studios. I’m sure modelers sound fine to a bedroom player. To each their own, but we know there is NO substitute for glowing power tubes & saturated transformers!
@@501chorusecho You are an example of why I, and others, still use producers for recordings, even if I have to wait. If I hired you to produce/engineer a record, I don’t have to worry about quality or getting the sound I want. That’s your job and why I or anyone would hire you. I’m too wrapped up in the playing and arranging, where I need to be, to think about it. I know I’m stepping in it here but: for anyone to argue in bad faith or be combative with/about Tom Bukovac (given his experience, musicality, and love for music) about recording or playing guitar is really not the way to go. Yes, there will be differences in opinion and experiences but taking jabs at him is unbelievably ignorant. It shows to me someone who has really lost their way musically and the joy of playing guitar.
I’d like someone to do a video with Tom where in the room he’s got his Princeton and an ODR-1, he’s in the control room, only hearing it through monitors, and someone plays a capture of his rig on a tonex, and have him try and identify which ones which by the feel alone only hearing it through the control room monitors.
Yep! That's the thing... people talk about feel, but what person is listening to music through amps? NO ONE, music is done in a mix, it is mastered it is done through monitors, it is rendered and released digitally.
@@areallyboredguy5825but the inspiration is in the players hands, if he doesnt feel inspired its not gonna be the right feel etc. Also, when playing live or in a band setting there is a big difference. Crank up a real amp next to a monitor and choose which one sounds the best at the same dB
@@ludvanlazarz live okay but I’m talking in a mix. And not that you made this argument but I feel like asking which is it? They don’t sound different in a mix to listeners so therefore they don’t sound different enough to warrant chasing. Or they do sound different but to the player and the player “may” play differently because of in room feel, a feeling that can’t exactly be captured, mastered, and released to the listeners.
Nowadays good digital amp solutions are 90+% of the real deal in terms of sound, maybe 70/80% in terms of feel but for many people a 100% worth compromise for weight, flexibility and budget.
I think the real trap is believing your gear HAS to sound like a vintage amp. How about focusing on getting a GREAT tone, period, which is totally possible with good modelers and speaker combos. This obsession with thinking that ONLY tube amps can sound good is ridiculous. Many recorded tones throughout rock history were guitars direct into consoles, no amp involved at all. A great tone is a great tone whether you've made it with a deluxe reverb or a Toyota Camry.
To be fair, direct into a vintage board would have meant going through tube-powered preamps and, in most cases, tube-powered compressors. At least until the solid-state amp came along.
What is even more ridiculous is to believe that vintage amp components are not degrading over time and still sound exactly like 50-60 years ago, when they were brand new and all the epic records had been made :)
I both agree and disagree with Tom. Yes, real amps still reign supreme, and while digital gets close, it’s not identical. That said, even two amps of the same brand and model can sound different. For most of us, getting close is more than good enough. Plus, I don’t have access to a closet full of amps, cabinets, mics, or some of the studio gear that’s included with digital options. And let’s be real-I can’t crank a Plexi to the volume it needs to truly shine.
Honestly, I’m getting tired of everyone getting hung up on the “sound” of digital. It’s kind of like the argument with the audiophiles about vinyl over everything else. Sure: a well mastered and carefully pressed high quality LP through a Macintosh tube amp and amazing speakers IS going to sound better than Spotify through Bluetooth headphones… But you have to listen to that one album right there in that space, and you can’t do anything else. And it’s going to cost you. And you have to be prepared to live with the quirks and compromises and glitches that come with the format. Noise, scratches, cleaning… And how much space it takes. You can’t shuffle a bunch of tracks from other artists in. And you will never get that quality in your car or when you’re jogging… so how do you live? You make the small sacrifice of slightly lower quality for a LOT more convenience is what you do. Guitar modeling and capturing is the same thing. Sure a pristine Blackface anything is always going to sound better in the room. But you have that one sound. In an amp that might give you a hernia if you aren’t careful. And you’ll have to maintain it. And you have to be aware of the quality of the wall power. And you have to have spare fuses and tubes. If you suddenly find you need the sound of a different amp, a Vox or a Marshall or a Dumble… well… you need to also get your hands on one of them. OR… for the price of a mid range tube amp, you can have a very close approximation of several hundred different amps, cabs, and an entire warehouse of effects and processing, that you can instantly put in any order you want, and swap out instantaneously if you change your mind. There will always be a place for a great tube amp and analog pedals… but as long as most of us are making music under less than ideal conditions, the modeling thing will have a reason to exist. How many folks today even know how to maintain and service tube gear? Size, price, convenience, and options should never be discounted.
And, for the record: this is coming from someone with 2 original Princetons (a Black and a Silverface) an original drip-edge Vibrolux, a Music Man 65 212, and a vintage Supro. But I also now own a Yamaha THR 30II. Which one sees the most use? The Yamaha. It’s not even close.
A guy here in NYC who’s mixed & mastered my recordings, got into an argument w/ another mastering engineer about a Nine Inch Nails remastered album released on vinyl. The guy was arguing that the vinyl re-release is soooo much than the original CD version in quality from his perspective. My friend said that it was by NO means better sound quality than the original CD version. The other engineer insisted he was wrong because he was a vinyl purist. Because that guy didn’t know, my friend said “I am the one who remastered it for the release on vinyl and I know what went into it”. Point is, digital and analogue have been side by side for decades and it’s a personal choice, not a collective agreement.
The biggest problem these days is that most of us, here in the UK, aren't playing venues where you can turn up a Fender Deluxe Reverb or Marshall Plexi.
When my guitar heroes were on the stage or in the studio, they didn't worry about whether anything they were using accurately reproduced the sound or feel of something else. They used what they had to get a sound and feel that inspired them. Even if that was just running directly into the desk. The important question has never been if X sounds like or feels like Y. You can get two Xs that came out of the factory one-after-another and they will sound and feel different. It is just finding something that sounds and feels good to you and then doing something with it.
But the bottom line is that your 'guitar heroes' didn't use digital simulations-the sound of a real amp is a big component of what makes them your guitar heroes.
@@lightningstrikes7314 The sound really doesn't change much IN A MIX, for the end user and the person listening unless you listen to guitar parts through guitar amps, bass guitar through bass amps, have speakers for the drums, keyboards, and vocals... you are never listening to what the artist is "feeling" so it is all a moot point.
@@lightningstrikes7314 That's not even true for a big portion of the younger guitarist community - a lot of people grew up listening to the sounds of Modern Metal / Djent / Progressive Metal, which the majority of players in that style had already ditched tube amps. So for many Metal guys, the sound of their Guitar Heroes IS digital! \m/
Rhett Shull, Tim Pierce and a 3rd guitarist(maybe Pete Thorne) in a studio testing a UA(I think) plugin(s) that simulate a fender and Marshall amp and the studio had real Marshall and fender amps to compare. The console operator switched between the real and plugin with one of the guitarist playing and they would try to guess which was the plugin versus the real amp. It was pretty much a 50/50 chance of getting it right. It was an eye opener.
But at least Tim and Pete have real credentials. Only Uncle Larry can press any buttons for me. Rhett makes prettier looking videos and vastly superior click bait but…….
The highest percentage of player experience is always in the fingers. This is where digital always falls flat. Listening to them like this alone is always difficult
I played digital for decades (Kemper, Line6, Vox Tonelab) and switched back to tube amps a couple of years ago. I can totally live with playing digital and I liked it for years but I found out that I play very different on a tube amp. The response is totally different from a digital amp and it also forces me to play in a different way that I seemed to like over the digital amps. So Tom is right in that aspect. Listening at FOH you won't hear the difference between a tube amp and let's say a Kemper but playing wise you will.
Totally agree a generation of guitar players are missing out on the feel of non digital (valve particularly) amps. I've seen some of the greats who have tried digital and their playing is always diminished by the clinical response of modellers. The audience might not notice a difference in sound, however as a player I have to enjoy my show.
Before his death Dumble said, para phrasing here, digital is getting close to capturing the tone and feel of an actual amp and it's only a matter of time before it does, and it will eventually happen. This being said, if you can't achieve beautiful tones and create beautiful music from a simple set up like a Fender Princeton/Deluxe, Marshall or Vox with 2 or 3 classic pedals, all the digital gear and tone chasing will never make you sound great.
This is the amp in the room versus mic'ed amp argument again. No one can reliably tell the difference when A/B'ing recorded sounds that are well dialed in. This has been shown over and over again. But they can definitely tell the difference standing in front of a real amp vs a modeler through a monitor/FRFR. Especially if they're the ones playing the guitar.
@@homemaintenance1234 owning antique and vintage gear is just a status symbol now. Prove me wrong. Nobody is making any hit records with that shit, and everyone and their brother play guitar nowadays.
What Tom is saying is true, but you gotta be in the room with the amp to experience that difference, and most of it is the cab and 12-inch speaker interacting with the amp-though tube saturation, compression, and “sag” are also perceptible. Beyond that, amps are quirky. They are inconsistent from day to day. They make funny noises, generate heat, and have electricity that is audible when amplified. Funny that sound engineers spent years trying to eliminate these sounds, but they are what make the amp “real.” It's a physical thing, and you need to live with an amp in your room that you use regularly to appreciate those nuances. Once it’s recorded, all of these points are (mostly) useless and people can’t hear an appreciable difference. No matter what, some people are gonna get religious about this stuff. It’s all relative and contextual and the application is what matters most. For Tom, in his garage, on a stage, in a professional sound studio, I have no doubt those differences are real and important. If it makes you feel and play better then it matters. Does the audience care? Yeah, probably not so much.
Exactly! I have played with a custom made high powered tweed for hundreds of gigs and it was amazing at the best of times. But sometimes it sounded completely different from gig to gig and overall I just found tube amps inconsistent for what I needed. In recent years I have valued a smaller form factor and a unit that is consistent from gig to gig that I still enjoy the sound of once I have dialled it in. Especially now that silent stages are more and more common, having a tube amp behind me becomes kinda redundant when I had the sound coloured from a sm57 hung down over the speaker going into my IEMs. Never mind the whole weight factor, setting up, packing down ect...
It's from an older Home Skoolin video. Who cares if you care, he cares about his craft and work and he knows what works for him. Maybe if you would work in his environment you would care as well.
People care because they look up to him, and for good reason, he’s a top session player. Not that his opinion is gospel, but he’s no average guitar player.
Tom may be describing the feel of the gear under his fingers in real time. No way he can hear a difference of the recording and probably not through a mixer/PA
Lol no you dont. People use the AxeFx in arenas. I suggest you look at your setup. I also own nearly 10 tube amps and 5 solid state. I have no problem with any of them. Almost all high watt power amps are class D solid state.
@@imnotfishing You’re not Jeff Beck. If the reason you ‘need’ (your word) tubes is that Jeff Beck used them then that right there explains an awful lot about the state of guitar playing, and the guitar industry, today. I’m sorry to say it because I do like Beck, and he has some legendary albums, but towards the end he was just a parody of himself. To be fair, you can probably say that about most artists granted a sufficiently long career. Anyway, you didn’t answer the question. I suspect you don’t need tubes, you need a louder power amp for your Helix, whether it’s solid state, digital, or tubes. Your presets will sound different at volume - you can usually fix that with EQ.
When I play with my band where we use wedges and amps sitting on stage, I can absolutely tell the difference between a modeler and real amp cranked and sitting 6 ft behind me. When I play at church with no speakers or monitors on stage and everything running thru IEMs, I absolutely cannot tell the difference between a modeler and mic’d amp under the stage in an iso cab.
John, I think we can all agree that you are the Tom Bukovac of dialing in a tone. I haven't seen anyone who can get a modeler/profiler to sound exactly like the original gear like you can. Thank you for the excellent content, the entertainment, and the knowledge!
I’ve got tube amps both new and vintage and I’ve had a Kemper for years and have a Fractal and for recordings, I’m more than happy with using either and I’ve often recorded both on the same songs and when I listen back now, I can’t tell which was which. You’ve got to spend some time dialing in both and working through their strengths and weaknesses. The one issue I’ve noticed with all digital gear is that they’re not quite as sensitive to (or at least it’s just plain different) with how it responds to rolling back my guitars volume. Now for in the room sound, I’m a full stack guy all the way and a modeler into a PA just doesn’t have the live feel of real amps in the room but being able to tweak and “mod” amps on the fractal in ways I don’t have the skills to do with a real amp.
As a longtime Helix user, I’ve recently made the jump to Fractal. I noticed a huge improvement in the modeling in the Fractal world. When I got my FM9, I created the same rig in my Helix rack and the FM9, the difference was beyond noticeable. Could I dial in the Helix to sound like the Fractal? Possibly, but the feel and warmth of the new modeling technology in the Fractal was something I found more pleasing. As for tubes vs modeling, tubes will always have that random nature and harmonics that modeling doesn’t have, yet. Can you tell the difference when listening to a recording? We’ve all seen the shootouts and the overwhelming majority cannot tell. In the end, do what makes you happy and don’t be bothered by what others think.
To be honest, if you are an artist creating your own sound and music… IT DOESN’T MATTER. I’m absolutely sure that if the Beatles or Jimi Hendrix were in their prime today… they would be using EVERYTHING available to make their music stand out 🎸 These are only tools. Merry Christmas to all of you
That is not the issue. Steve Vai has used digital recreations, but his sound is abrasive and he often looks to find jarring sounds. I think it highly unlikely that your heroes would use a Tonex for instance. They were indeed great precisely because they were driven by sound. Emulations of a thing are just that emulations. Sad wannabes have bought into the hype that we have seen many times now about emulations being as good as. With a few exceptions I do analogue only. There is an enormous difference. If you want to play 80s hair metal by all means, but then the sounds they produced were often rubbish. As it was very few were digital.
The part and your playing - 100% that's what matters. I've heard people with great gear who didn't play well enough for anyone who was only using their ears to know it was great gear. A better player plugs into the same rig with the same settings and suddenly it sounds amazing.
I'm a veteran tube guy who has been hardcore with Kemper for the past 5 years (LOVE it) and dabbled with HX Stomp (interesting but not loving as much) - if we are talking about recording, at this stage I think almost anyone would be hard-pressed to consistently win a blind listening test of the modelers/profilers vs. a real amp. The in-the-room live experience is a different thing, but I find the Kemper gear in particular comes close enough for me at the moment. No experience with QC or Tonex, but would not be surprised if people on those platforms have similar feedback to mine. But for me, perhaps more important than the sounds, is the play feel, and interaction with the guitar/player. The immediacy of a guitar into real amp is hard to beat, but again, I think Kemper comes pretty darn close. HX, not as much - I find that with HX, the guitar responsiveness is a little softer, and I have to push a bit harder to get the amp models to react the way I want them to. Would be interesting to hear how these other platforms like Dream, QC, Tonex deliver on this point. But I disagree with Tom's general argument that cheap digital technology won't ultimately do what the old stuff does - it's getting closer every day. Tubes will always have an allure, but today's tech is finally getting closer to replicating the magic - eventually they will close the gap IMO. I also think it's funny that people championing those vintage amps typically drive them with crappy, solid state OD boxes in front - so much for the tube mystique ;) John - I really enjoy checking out your videos - keep'em coming :) Very insightful and appreciated.
My bottom line is: “Does it sound good? Am I able to get the type of sound that I’m looking for to get the job done?” I’m not so much into nailing a specific amp tone perfectly. However, I’m just one guy playing in a top 40 cover/party band. Cheers!
I have to agree with Tom. I love digital amps and modelers. It's convenient, light weight, easy to use and sounds good enough. But when you sit next to a real Fender, Vox or Marshall, and run a modeler of the same amp. Always feels like something is missing from the modeler. I love my Catalyst CX, and all the other modelers I use for playing live and recording on the fly. But if I can, I am picking a real Fender Black Panel, Vox or Marshall.
By the time it’s filtered through the mic or the speakers or the DAW or the PA or your cell phone, it doesn’t matter. An amplifier might be a better experience for the player in the room, but from the listener standpoint, it couldn’t matter any less.
I’ve got two of the big dog Modelers. Both sound great in a mix, which is the most important thing. But-anyone that tries to sell you that they FEEL like a real amp is lying, have terrible sensory perception in their fingers, or they have no frame of reference. They get close (I find it is depending on the model), but they aren’t quite there. There’s a certain “steely” quality about the touch of them, across all platforms I’ve tried/bought. There’s a certain response that a tube amp has that you can’t replicate fully without those glowing tubes in the signal path. You can’t take one of the primary components out of what makes a tube amp and expect it to sound like a tube amp. It’s a simple concept that people’s egos can’t handle. That said, modelers are my favorite thing. They’re (generally) more cost effective, and VASTLY more valuable as far as form factor. But the next generation of them need to cut the crap and go tube front-end.
Context is everything. Tom has the luxury of hearing his tones through very high end gear in an engineered environment. I have no doubt he can tell the difference. For mere mortals like me, anything that inspires me is good enough. It’s similar to the difference between a 5k custom shop and a 2k production guitar, the 3k difference amounts to a 3% improvement in quality. The value of that is a very personal choice.
I asked Tom once how he usually would set his amp. He wrote, dude I set it to where I like the tone. Play with the knobs. If you don’t like any of the choices sell it and buy something that you do like the tone.
In my living room I honestly couldn't hear a difference between them. But I wasn't using headphones - or playing the guitar myself. If I was playing, maybe I would have been aware of a significant difference. It's encouraging that the difference can now be so small. But anything Tom says, I respect. If I had younger ears and no tinnitus, it would no doubt help.
Buk and crew came to nyc, played on gear that could be found at your local guitar center. The nashville 3 all played travel-friendly partscasters, a few carefully chosen pedals, a deluxe reverb + sm57/E906. Sonically speaking, it was a tone junkie’s paradise. By far the best sounding guitar show ive seen since 1986. My hair stood upon my neck, and never went down. If you ever have the opportunity, its a bucketlist guitar experience. I.m.o. Todays digital modelers are not even the pimple on the asscheeks of what was sonically available since the late 1950’s
John found what we’re REALLY missing in the first couple minutes…The “Bukovac’s hands y brain” plugin! Soooo… My CV includes: couple decades in vans and clubs, the occasional opening spot for a national act, a jazz degree, which qualifies me to work in any fast food restaurant on the planet and a quarter century of being a television and film composer. Thus, take anything that follows with at least a pound of salt. I’ve also served as a test pilot twanger to develop cabinet models for one of the big modeler companies. (was that obscure enough to not violate my nondisclosure?) My first experience with the tone master deluxe model was one morning at guitar Center. The store was virtually empty. It was sitting right next to a deluxe with the big metal ingot (transformer) inside it and the glass bottles (tubes). I was able to get them to sound as close to identical as “my“ ears could get them within a minute or two. The only reason I didn’t buy it then was due to the fact the taper on the Reverb was impossible to adjust. (it was either too much or not enough. There was no way to find sweet spot!) A a few months later, I saw Keith on 5 W world during a review of ALL of the deluxe models. (He had vintage, custom shop, and at that point the “upgraded“ version of the tone master version - the unit with the blonde cabinet and oxblood speaker cloth and celestion neodyminun speaker. Most of my attention went toward the upgraded tone master. I basically sat there watching the upgrades that they had made to the previous model go by. I was kind of bummed because I knew where there was a brand new one for merely $800 US. Then Keith mentioned: “if you’ve bought the earlier one and want these upgrades, there’s a USB jack in the bottom of the amp chassis!“ I immediately ditched my jammies and got in the truck to go buy the cheap one. To me, the tone master series is a unicorn of sorts in the sense that it was truly designed to function in an analog realm. (Read: clubs with a mic or not. These days I play in rooms that the PA is only for the vocals) For my work in TV/filmland I generally used a mixture of mic’d amps and “models” (mostly stock Logic stuff) using the proprietary cabinet models I had access to. I dearly love Tom and hang on every note and bit of wisdom he imparts but, once that little black tube is placed SOMEWHERE in the circumference of that speaker, that audio is about to be converted into a binary supposition. It’s the way of the world now… So… here’s something I did long ago. One of the guitars is an amp with a 58 on it, the other is a model with cab model… I no longer remember which was which… (yammering at the front is Larry Mullins (Swans etc) being interrogated by Mike Watt (Minutemen , MSSV) in Portugal when they were the rhythm section for Iggy and the Stooges. Hope it at least amuses… John, you’re one of the brighter spots in the twang phylum! Thanks for all you do! ua-cam.com/video/BOIMgYd_F5k/v-deo.html
The feel under the fingers is different, especially at higher volumes - sound and tone wise there may not be much difference but feel wise they will feel different especially when play loud.
Well the only thing I'll say is that in the room. There's a difference. You can feel it in your chest when you're playing through a tube amp. A solid state or modeler there's just the sound. The sound is the same. It's just the feel.
No, some solid state work e.g. JC120. Very much depends the sound you want. Plenty of good ss amps. However, what we are talking about here is emulations I.e. imitations.
I have been gigging for 51 years, I have used Plexis, Twin Reverbs, Ac30s and many more (I currently have a Bogner Shiva 20th anniversary ,a Friedman Plex, PRS HDRX20, an ENGL Steve MOrse mini and an early 70s Champ. I would love to use these live but where I am quiet stages are the norm, even a cranked Champ is pretty loud. I currently favor the Fractal FM3 for my live work with one band and the Nano Cortex for the other, I am 68 and am still gigging twice a week and am currently rehearsing with 2 bands. I don't want to carry heavy amps to small gigs but would have no problem with using real amps in outdoor shows if they are practical. I have been using digital solutions for many years, are they as good as amps well that is a hard question to answer, they are designed to emulate a recorded amp and cab so it is not a realistic comparison. A real amp through a cabinet is not going to sound like the modeler through an FRFR OR PA when they are in the same room. In a recording on the other hand after all the processing, mixing and mastering et al are completed it would be virtually impossible to tell which guitar had used the real amp and which had used the modeler. I have recorded tracks that were done years ago and I know I used a Fender Supersonic on one track and my AXEFX 3 on another, I can't tell which are which. Realistically what it comes down to is what works for the individual, Tom works with real amps all the time and he is fortunate that he can do that, not everyone can.
I wish Tom would do some blindfolded tests, with some people who really know how to dial things in. I'm recently back into tube amps big time... but I've recorded a ton of music with all types of simulations over the past 15 years too. I too love the feel of the amp in the room and how it makes you play, but Tom listens as he plays ...on headphones... to the cab/amp in "another room" so he doesn't have that sensation that everyone points to. So if they could get a bunch of different digital stuff and a few amps coming back in the headphones... is it possible he might be able to play the same stuff with all of them? I have some wicked total sound presets in NDSP's Tone King amp and others that can make you really creative. Even Guitar Rig has some great presets. I use the Kemper a lot also. He should experience the best of those.
I’m 59 yrs old. Been around the amp/guitar block for 45 years. It’s all about laziness. There is a visceral difference and a purity of the beginning of the Fender/Gibson/Marshall era. Nothing will ever sound as good or as warm and real as those early amps/guitars. Just like the 50’s and 60’s muscle cars. Tell me an original Shelby Cobra isn’t the most pure form of driving experience? Everyone sits in front of iPhones, computers, digital and E-everything. There’s NO argument. These modern modelers, Tesla cars, Social Media….they are efficient and time-saving and small. But ALL of it is disposable and artificial as is most popular music today. Ask Tom, he has to play the same 2-3 chord progressions every day and make them sound ‘different’ or exciting in each new arrangement. Human beings are not digital creatures. That Golden Era of design in automotive, music gear And architecture for that matter…will never be topped for longevity. Tom is 100% right. Keep convincing yourselves that today’s watered down junk is something you’ll cherish for 70 years? It’s a shallow artificial and meaningless world of watered down junk spoon fed to the masses by corporate shrinkflation giants. The one issue that is tricky is that much of that vintage gear is unattainable due to the sentimental value placed on on these things. Most new guitars from Fender are junk…as are modern Amps. Kids can’t afford the older stuff and new stuff is not built to last. Last good vintage style fender guitars(AVRI)were made in 2016. Gibson on the other hand makes killer new Les Paul R8,R9 and R0 guitars that rival the originals. But $10,000? Not realistic for a young guitarist.
I agree we're being sold the digital narrative at the expense of quality. I think it's a lot easier for manufacturers to sell us digital things (easier to manufacture, takes up less or no physical space). Add the promise of "hundreds of amps in a tiny box" and people feel like they're getting a great value. They're the MP3s of guitar.
Bottom Line: End listeners care about the music you make, not the gear you used to make it. Tone doesn't matter to the listener once you get above "good enough". It's all about the song. As a player, those little differences, or playing in the room with the amp, may yield a better, more inspired take, but ultimately it's all about the notes you play.
I know this is a strange comparison, but I feel like it's sword vs. gun. When the firearm came along to challenge the sword, the concept of the chivalrous knight disappeared. Warfare before that had codes of conduct and honor - then the firearm came along and that was gone. The firearm gained the same result - elimination of the enemy. But something was lost. Now I don't condone use of either of those things, but there is a spiritual aspect of the amp vs digital thing that people don't consider. There is the "knowing" that it is digital - despite the tone and feel and those catch words. Digital - as good as it is - will take some spirit out of music. It just will, for some people.Tone isn't everything, just as precision isn't everything (see Jimmy Page). The feel of the amp in the room, the way it vibrates off the body of an ES335 - hell, even the smell of the tubes cooking - all of that adds up in the experience, I think. But yeah, digital SOUNDS fine. That may be good enough for some people.
If we all were searching for the most natural sounds from the instruments, wouldn't we all just play acoustic and not electric guitars? Electric are all mod'd via boosting the signal and so on. My advice, play what you like, through what you like as often as you like and, enjoy.
Whenever I watch this kind of discussion, I always think that please don't take away the opportunities for young guitar player to play real thing. I know the digital products are great these days and I can get why influencers like to discuss about this because everyone likes this discussion, but playing loud guitar amps and control it is completely different thing. And simply, it's fun. Armature players doesn't need to think so much about versatility or portability or anything like that where professional musicians need to consider. I feel everything is commercialized too much these days.
Its what the audience hears what counts, an amp with mic in front, probably going to digital mixing desk controlled by other person, is more likely to get messed up and ends up digital anyway. Most modern bands now have inear monitors so not even hearing their amp on stage either.
Being in the same room and playing through a cranked tube amp - you can't currently match that let alone beat it. It makes you play differently which I've never achieved with digital. You play 'better'.
Isn't how it feels important ? A good tube amp feels different when your playing than something digital to me , some things just feel more lively when your playing, just as some overdrive feel more lively in your hands when playing , but yes they are extremely close in sound , but how it feels is the question
I mean, we are splitting hairs, aren't we? Tom is right it won't be the same thing. Maybe my ears are not trained after decades of playing through the gear he plays through but when I listen to your compares here, I can hardly tell the difference between the three. Closing my eyes and listening, actively, I can't tell when your video switches through them. At the end of the day if we enjoy the sound does it matter if it was created by a modeler or tubes? If it inspires us to play what is the big deal?
I'm sure Tom is right, but the difference is so small as to be irrelevant for me. He works on pro records with a budget. I doubt I can even mic up a DR and get a better sound than my Dream 65.
As someone who is just two years into my guitar journey after drumming for 30 plus years, I can tell you that while its on my list to get a tube amp in the next year, and I would love to explore a fully analog chain at some point, fully half my playing is in headphones late at night, and 95 percent of it is sat in front of my computer at this point so Tonex has been a lifesaver AND really helped me dial in what kind of physical amps I interested in.
The trouble is, most people wouldn’t know good tone if they tripped over it. I’ve been lucky enough to play through just about all the vintage Fender and Vox amps, and many boutiques. Believe me, nothing compares.
I just played another show with several bands. They had the horse and buggy pedals, patch cables, tube amp miced up, etc. I had the AXE 3. There is no comparison at shows anymore. I do not believe I sound better. I KNOW I SOUND BETTER. I went to the front and sat there for every band when I was not onstage. Not even close. And THEY SAID SO THEMSELVES. No buzz. No hiss. No patch cable degradation. No mic noise. We all know, move the mic one half inch, you just changed the sound. I would ask Tom, do you know better than Metallica? Or Neal Schon? Of course not. The days of grandad's TS9 through a stupid little amp are over. And good riddance. Its enough and time to move on.
Those of us without Bukovac's super-amazing ears really struggle. For example, I'm trying to match Bukovac's tone, and I'm not quite certain if he uses a 6-foot cable or a 10-foot cable. And just to make the point clear about how bad modellers really are, none of them to my knowledge have a setting for cable length. I think this really proves Bukovac's point.
If you listen to your playing and don't know when the switches are being made between each setup, you cant tell the difference at all. And if you can,. I bet you can't tell which one is which.
Front end analog back end digital…that’s my approach. When I use analog pedals for compression, drives, gain stages, and amp sims and digital modulation, delays, reverbs, cabinet sims. It maintains the FEEL of playing guitar and reacts properly with my pickups / volume pot.
Biggest difference (one I seldom hear discussed) is that modelling necessarily includes the microphone. What is modelled is a recorded sound, not the sound of an amp/cab in a room. I have played a Fender Junior on a session, had it break down and replaced with a Helix model. As I was playing in the control room but recording the Junior, loud, in the main studio, the replacement made virtually no difference. But modelling can never replicate the feeling of standing in front of and interacting with an amp in a live situation.
Dosnt matter how much you digital fans want it to be true it isn’t . Tom is right ! You genuinely can’t get the exact same tone . I’ve used all the modellers and capture boxes out there and they definitely sound different . They are close don’t get me wrong . Similar but they don’t react the same at all. When capturing amp sounds we’ve used on records they sound so damn close when you play exactly the same part with exactly the same dynamics but as soon as you alter it in any way it falls apart ! Same as emulations of vintage gear . I have original 1073s and old vintage pultecs and 1176s and LA2As , the emulations are in a similar ball park but the UAD 1073 unison dosnt capture a microphone the same as a 1073, but also I have 9 channels of 1073 and there all different really . My 2 blackface 1176 sound different to each other 2 and they are the same revision and a year apart in manufacture date in the 70s So it’s definitely a lot better than it used to be but it isn’t the same at all
But literally several amps can also sound different from one another... so splitting hairs on the 5% difference seems moot when there can be a 5% difference just between two amps.
Some times when I’m playing amp sims my guitar feels like a midi controller and using it to trigger pre recorded samples sounds from the amp plugin. There’s a real liveliness to real tube amps sounds most of my tone shaping takes seconds usually just turning the gain knob i can get many tones from tube amp versus a amp plugin it can take an hour of tweaking to get something usable tone from a plugin.
Guy with hundreds of thousands of dollars tied up in vintage gear asserts that it sounds totally unique from modellers. Obviously in a perfect world modellers will (at least one day, even if you don't believe it now) only sound 99.9% as close to that which they are modelling, but for 99.9% of guitarists and 100% of listeners they are indistinguishable.
I appreciate the time you spent to do this, very interesting. When Tom said that, it got me thinking about the unique sound & feel of tube amps, and this video really helped me to hear what Tom has been saying. The difference in the sound was actually quite shocking to me.
The Dream had more gain and high end, the Nano Cortex was dark, the real amp was clearer, warmer, and better sounding. At live volumes? I don’t think anyone would notice a difference. Nailing the riff is way more important than nailing the tone. In the US at bar gigs and outdoors a 1x12 amp is perfectly acceptable. A good attenuator really helps. I play once or twice a month at church in front of 500-800 people on a silent stage, and an iridium with delay and reverb afterwards sounds better than my Tone King in an isolation cab. Maybe if I had better mics than an SM57 and an e906 it would be different?
Tom would sound great playing through a cardboard box. He can use whatever he likes. Most of us aren’t in that position. For me, I would love to use my Victoria bassman at the ideal volume on every gig! Sure. Reality is, I use a FM3 because it sounds better (!) at the volume I have to play at on many gigs and gives me all the tones I need. No one complains about my tone. Merry Christmas JNC. Enjoy
The nice thing about Tom (and others) is they always say they wouldn't use X/Y/Z but if you enjoy it and it fits your circumstances go for it. They never say you're less of a player for not using expensive/vintage gear
@@Drtydeeds Well, maybe, sorta, kinda at times. But in Buk's defense everyone has a bad day every once in awhile. Plus, that cranky, old man stubborn affect starts to set in when you get over the hump in life. Not to mention you can't teach an old dog new tricks! Just saying...... ++Peace, Funk & Rock n' Roll 4 Your Soul My Friend++. 🤘😜🤘
Your music is how you feel. Period. Use what makes YOU feel good. I play three Marshall stacks. At home. Plus vintage pedals AND a modeler, an old Aria Pro II LP copy and a 2016 Gibson Std. and a 97 Fender Strat, a 85 Flying V with Kahler - yikes! I couldn't care less if someone disagrees with my choice of gear. I feel great. Pure fun.
Tom is exactly right!!! Look, the bottom line is a musical piece of equipment that’s heavy and will kill you if you stick your finger into the back of it cannot be compacted down to a little sissy piece of digital comfort. Maybe it sounds good and is eq’d to compare to a certain amp but it’s not even close to the same thing!!
Tom is right. For recording, digital is now really close, but in the room it sounds like a valve amp, with a blanket thrown over it. Sorry, speaking as someone who has digital systems and valve amps that’s my honest assessment. Give it 10 years and I suspect they’ll crack it, but not yet.
It would have been good to do this exercise as an A/B/C blind test and see what people thought was what gear in each case (as well as which they preferred).
I mean, Tom uses a Line 6 M9 on his board. Granted, that's not an amp modeler, but that's still modeling and using tech that is far older than modern DSP stuff.
You may not be Tom, but that chord progression in your intro (was it improvised?!) is so lovely-very evocative, and a bit wistful. Re: "sounding like the real thing," one has to define one's goals. Is it to sound like the amp to the player in the room (which is not just about tone, but also about interaction with the player)? Is it to sound like the amp, recorded, and played back to a critical listener? Is it to sound good to a casual listener? Also, we're all trying to the best we can with the resources at hand, including money, time, supplementary equipment (mics, load boxes, a good room), expertise (in amp miking), etc.. Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good enough. -Tom
I can barely ever tell the difference when it's recorded music being played back (videos or album tracks). It's all about being in the room and feeling/hearing the amp. I need that for when i play live and loud. Otherwise, digital is totally fine for recording/practicing etc. Actually recording is much easier with digital than trying to mic things.
I've had some time recently to get back into recording, and my opinions are as follows: I definitely like the "feel" and "sound in the room" of my real tube amp better than anything else, and I think that's what Uncle Larry is talking about more than recording - that and playing live, of course. I had the Dream '65 for about a day (someone got a hella good deal on Reverb) and I hated it. For recording various tones, and the variety, it's hard to beat the HX Stomp (or in my case, the Stomp XL). John's HX Stomp presets (so cheap and what a Christmas present!) are the best way to get started in getting great recorded tones and then being able to tweak them to make them your own. However, when I am playing through my studio monitors, it sounds/feels nothing like my real amp does, but I don't care - the recorded tone in the track is what matters to me, and my HX Stomp XL does the trick (and then some). Plus, being able to SAVE the exact settings in a preset and then come back the next day to do overdubs and not worry if knobs had been bumped makes it so easy. So, to summarize, when playing live or in my studio, I prefer the real tube amp for inspiration. For recording, the convenience and sounds of the HX Stomp XL are my way to go. Thanks for a great video, John, and Merry (Happy) Christmas to you!
The main component missing from all this Tom bashing is this: how does it sound in a BAND context & in a deep recording mix? That’s where the rubber meets the road. Modeling amps disappear to my ears in a live band setting. I used to do testing for a BIG company known in the modeling world. Once I compared the modeling rigs to my tube amps in my band, there was no contest. Even my bandmates were complaining about not being able to hear the modeling rig through the drums, bass, keys, and 2nd guitar rig. Facts.
I feel that the biggest difference between analog an digital is the dynamic response. So finding similar sound on a nondynamic sample, soft like You did in the start, or hard like the ToneX capture sample seems a bit flawed
I used to be anti-digital, but it is coming so close I can no longer dismiss it. Since I started using cab ir's I've been a convert. Modelling will eventually be indistinguishable at the rate it's going. I will never stop thinking abalog is cooler.
The real amp has more even order harmonics. You can hear a little bit of a fizzly crackle in the high end with the modelers. One thing is, clean and edge of breakup tones like this will always sound more convincing. It's usually higher gain settings where you can hear the crackly artifacts and lack of soundstage.
The fact of the matter is as soon as you place a mic in front of the cab, you are now playing a sample. If you aren’t in direct earshot of the cab itself, you are hearing an approximation of the real thing. Does it “feel” different from digital? Sure, but even that has become closer over the last few years. I get the argument, but if I’m having fun, getting good tones, and my listener enjoys it, then it really doesn’t matter what the source is. 🤷♂️
John, my videos on my YT channel are currently (most recently) using the ME-90 Twin and a Headrush FRFR speaker all into an iPhone 13 microphone (live). I have a couple videos of using the UA Enigmatic into Logic. And they probably sound best. I have a Tone Master Twin and have had a real one in the past. The Tone Master is pretty sweet. But, I currently really like my ME-90 Twin choice and the Headrush speaker. Tom (Uncle Larry) is full of it. I've used it all because I've played for 58 years. And, I think the digital is very nice and I'm currently trying to work out my optimum gear for both live and recording. I'm really leaning on the ME-90 and my UA Dumble pedal. It's tricky and I've had weird issues with my interface but I really want the sound quality of my guitar into the Headrush.
It's all about what gear tools work for you. A lot of session players are like Tom with regard to real amps versus models. Both can do the job live or in the studio. You can't argue with Tom's success as a session player. Dan Huff would also be in that same category.
Of course Tom is right. BUT, the choices are: 1. Get a modeling setup for less and sound maybe 90% or more the same and have more effects right away, 2. Run out and spend 5-10k for an amp and some great pedals, or 3. Acquire traditional gear slowly over the course of 10 years or more and get a setup that way. I chose number 3, that was my choice and I love it. Make your own choice, learn your instrument, and don't put down other people's choices whichever way they decide to go. Just worry about playing and having fun.
The reality of it is you probably can't get the exact tone of a 'Black Face Fender' but that said no two amps sound the same regardless of if they have tubes or not. I know because I always run in stereo and when I was running two of the exact same amps (regardless of manufacturer) they sounded different from each other. The thing with 'digital' is not to think that your'e going to run your modeler into a 10" PA or FRFR and think you're going to get the sound of a 100W SLP running a 4X12 cabinet. You have to take into consideration what you're going to run it though and not just that, but rather than trying to get it to sound exactly like some other amp why not use the gear to get your own sound. Personally, I have much better results getting the sound I want using my Axe-Fx III into my Quilters rather than having two tubes amps and a pedalboard and worrying about if the tubes are going to crap out on the gig and then when you replace them it sounds like a totally different amp or something goes wrong with the pedalboard.
I think anyone who thinks a modeller sounds like an amp in the room is missing the point. This argument is old now. We all know what a modeller is and we all know what an amp is. Use what works for you.
Digital amplifiers sound too fizzy to me. I started playing in 1962. Started with surf music went to classic rock then to blues only in about 1973. Made a living at it for most of my life. Back then we played loud enough to get great tone out of 50 watt amps. Most of the younger players have not experienced that. So most are used to tone through pedals. And many are digital. When you convert analog sound to digital you lose a very large part of it harmonics and overtones that make the sound rich and sweet. My advice is get a tube amp and use an attenuator to get the volume down. I know they are heavy if you can't carry it go to the gym. I'm 75 now and I'm still carrying a super reverb to gigs. Cheers.
I never heard a band with modelers sound better than a band with real amps. I played both and I can assure you I went once at a gig where out of 8 band I was the only one using the cheap in-house tube amp and I literally mauled everybody else, my clean tones were crispier, warmer, better. My solo tone was nothing that they could ever reach with a modeler, I'm sorry to upset a lot of modeler fanboys but if you don't believe me do a gig with a modeler and then do a gig with Boss Katana and it will be miles above even if it's not a tube amp
I thought of something else. Sorry. I bought my Harley Benton T-type guitar because of "Jon is TOO Loud", reviewer in Asia that can PLAY! His playing sold me on the guitar because I can play a bad guitar or amp and still make it sound good. I don't let the gear trap have a hold on me personally. I'll try things and I don't care what things cost or what other people think about it. I love my two new "cheap, non-vintage, brand-name" Harley Benton guitars and my "cheap?" Boss ME-90 and Headrush 2000watt? 8" speaker. The general listening population can't tell the difference. Most of the time, they don't ever mistakes that concern you, the guitarist.
My budget says I can’t afford to care what Tom says.
I like Tom as a player, but his opinion means NOTHING to me. Sound is sound .
Exactly. Also, it is hard enough to even tell a difference between the two when a/b'd, but put it in a mix and you won't be able to tell, nevermind non-guitar people being able to tell the difference or even care. Supposedly there is a feel difference with the sag of a real amp vs a modeler. but I feel that you get used to what you play.
I don't give a shit what Tom says period haha
@@JDStone20 You are 100% correct. The difference is in the "feel" of a tube amp and how it reacts to your playing, especially for edge-of-breakup stuff. Problem is that many tube amps have to be run at loud volumes before you really experience that. You can learn to make a modeler work for you and you can replicate much of those subtle nuances with volume and a good speaker (headphones don't really work for that).
My budget sympathises!
Different doesn’t mean worse. If it sounds good, it is good.
For me, it’s the tone I’m chasing. I couldn’t care less if it’s a physical amp or a digital replica, as long as it delivers the sound I want.
If it’s the tone you’re chasing, you’d play through a vintage or boutique tube amp. Hell, even a tweed pro junior will get you there.
Modelling is a representation of tone
A 1992 Ford Escort and new Porsche both drive 55 mph. If that’s all you want.
@@los_rubosIt’s like the difference between automatic and stick. The automatic is easier to use but less responsive to detail.
@@Ten2More Modelling is easier to use?
@@los_rubosIt’s a lot easier than figuring out how to touch the strings to make the amp react to create the desired sound. Studying manuals to find something is easier than spending time to find a way to physically touch the strings coordinating with the amp.
You trying to get even more people to hate me?
I honestly couldn’t care less…bring it on John
I will say it’s hardly surprising to me that even through a shitty load box and not even using a microphone, the pro still kicks the shit outta the other stuff…if you put a mic on that amp and then ran that mic through a nice Telefunken V76 or a nice API the way God Intended, the difference would even be waaaay more noticeable
I’ve read through the comments, the line from the pro Digital crowd seems to be “who cares I don’t hear a difference and if there is? Who gives a shit!” pretty much in line with what I would expect from that kind of talent level…a 16 to 30 year old demographic with that practised cynicism so common in this age range. Would you prefer sugar with your coffee or saccharine? Olive oil and balsamic on greens or corn oil and white vinegar? A Rolls-Royce and a Jaguar and a Ford Fiesta all do 75 mph on the way to Vegas. Which is the superior ride? Obviously the real amp and dedicated pedals are going to be better than any modler, if you’re happy with a Ford Fiesta ?…good for you, but don’t try to say that it’s as good as as a Rolls-Royce.
We will always love you, Uncle Larry. Thank you for speaking the truth.
I can think of very few people who can really judge how right Tom is about what he says. I mean, come on guys, Mr. Tom Bukovac is not an idiot and if he says so, then he has his good reasons for it. I honestly don't understand how anyone can get upset about this. He just tells his opinion, tells it like it is and he gets a lot of backlash in return. It's a crazy world... ps: "....the way God Intended..." = The Almighty in his infinite wisdom surely intended for an amp to be miked and the signal then run through a V76 or API... This is great, Tom! I mean, after all, he is God, right? Love it...and love you, man 🤣
Thanks Tom for stating the FACTS! I’ve said the same thing for years - some people simply either don’t play in bands or record guitars in real pro studios. I’m sure modelers sound fine to a bedroom player. To each their own, but we know there is NO substitute for glowing power tubes & saturated transformers!
@@501chorusecho You are an example of why I, and others, still use producers for recordings, even if I have to wait. If I hired you to produce/engineer a record, I don’t have to worry about quality or getting the sound I want. That’s your job and why I or anyone would hire you. I’m too wrapped up in the playing and arranging, where I need to be, to think about it.
I know I’m stepping in it here but: for anyone to argue in bad faith or be combative with/about Tom Bukovac (given his experience, musicality, and love for music) about recording or playing guitar is really not the way to go. Yes, there will be differences in opinion and experiences but taking jabs at him is unbelievably ignorant. It shows to me someone who has really lost their way musically and the joy of playing guitar.
I’d like someone to do a video with Tom where in the room he’s got his Princeton and an ODR-1, he’s in the control room, only hearing it through monitors, and someone plays a capture of his rig on a tonex, and have him try and identify which ones which by the feel alone only hearing it through the control room monitors.
Yep! That's the thing... people talk about feel, but what person is listening to music through amps? NO ONE, music is done in a mix, it is mastered it is done through monitors, it is rendered and released digitally.
@@areallyboredguy5825but the inspiration is in the players hands, if he doesnt feel inspired its not gonna be the right feel etc. Also, when playing live or in a band setting there is a big difference. Crank up a real amp next to a monitor and choose which one sounds the best at the same dB
@@ludvanlazarz live okay but I’m talking in a mix. And not that you made this argument but I feel like asking which is it? They don’t sound different in a mix to listeners so therefore they don’t sound different enough to warrant chasing. Or they do sound different but to the player and the player “may” play differently because of in room feel, a feeling that can’t exactly be captured, mastered, and released to the listeners.
Music is also performed live. That’s where it’s different.
He will definitely know when he plays the amp or the sim.
Nowadays good digital amp solutions are 90+% of the real deal in terms of sound, maybe 70/80% in terms of feel but for many people a 100% worth compromise for weight, flexibility and budget.
@@quartaltrio747 Careful! Don’t say the word “feel” around here because people get upset ;)
I think the real trap is believing your gear HAS to sound like a vintage amp. How about focusing on getting a GREAT tone, period, which is totally possible with good modelers and speaker combos. This obsession with thinking that ONLY tube amps can sound good is ridiculous. Many recorded tones throughout rock history were guitars direct into consoles, no amp involved at all. A great tone is a great tone whether you've made it with a deluxe reverb or a Toyota Camry.
To be fair, direct into a vintage board would have meant going through tube-powered preamps and, in most cases, tube-powered compressors. At least until the solid-state amp came along.
What is even more ridiculous is to believe that vintage amp components are not degrading over time and still sound exactly like 50-60 years ago, when they were brand new and all the epic records had been made :)
I both agree and disagree with Tom. Yes, real amps still reign supreme, and while digital gets close, it’s not identical. That said, even two amps of the same brand and model can sound different. For most of us, getting close is more than good enough. Plus, I don’t have access to a closet full of amps, cabinets, mics, or some of the studio gear that’s included with digital options. And let’s be real-I can’t crank a Plexi to the volume it needs to truly shine.
Yes with tubes it can be all over the place.
You basically said what I did, in less than half the words. Good job!
My budget says modelers are just fine for my needs, thanks.
Honestly, I’m getting tired of everyone getting hung up on the “sound” of digital.
It’s kind of like the argument with the audiophiles about vinyl over everything else.
Sure: a well mastered and carefully pressed high quality LP through a Macintosh tube amp and amazing speakers IS going to sound better than Spotify through Bluetooth headphones…
But you have to listen to that one album right there in that space, and you can’t do anything else.
And it’s going to cost you. And you have to be prepared to live with the quirks and compromises and glitches that come with the format. Noise, scratches, cleaning… And how much space it takes.
You can’t shuffle a bunch of tracks from other artists in. And you will never get that quality in your car or when you’re jogging… so how do you live?
You make the small sacrifice of slightly lower quality for a LOT more convenience is what you do.
Guitar modeling and capturing is the same thing.
Sure a pristine Blackface anything is always going to sound better in the room.
But you have that one sound. In an amp that might give you a hernia if you aren’t careful. And you’ll have to maintain it. And you have to be aware of the quality of the wall power. And you have to have spare fuses and tubes.
If you suddenly find you need the sound of a different amp, a Vox or a Marshall or a Dumble… well… you need to also get your hands on one of them.
OR… for the price of a mid range tube amp, you can have a very close approximation of several hundred different amps, cabs, and an entire warehouse of effects and processing, that you can instantly put in any order you want, and swap out instantaneously if you change your mind.
There will always be a place for a great tube amp and analog pedals… but as long as most of us are making music under less than ideal conditions, the modeling thing will have a reason to exist.
How many folks today even know how to maintain and service tube gear?
Size, price, convenience, and options should never be discounted.
And, for the record: this is coming from someone with 2 original Princetons (a Black and a Silverface) an original drip-edge Vibrolux, a Music Man 65 212, and a vintage Supro.
But I also now own a Yamaha THR 30II.
Which one sees the most use?
The Yamaha. It’s not even close.
A guy here in NYC who’s mixed & mastered my recordings, got into an argument w/ another mastering engineer about a Nine Inch Nails remastered album released on vinyl. The guy was arguing that the vinyl re-release is soooo much than the original CD version in quality from his perspective.
My friend said that it was by NO means better sound quality than the original CD version. The other engineer insisted he was wrong because he was a vinyl purist. Because that guy didn’t know, my friend said “I am the one who remastered it for the release on vinyl and I know what went into it”. Point is, digital and analogue have been side by side for decades and it’s a personal choice, not a collective agreement.
Ding. Ding. Ding!!
@@edlib02169but are you are musician?
@@raygehringyes, it’s your choice or not to go with something inferior and then justify it. They are not the same, period. Cope.
The biggest problem these days is that most of us, here in the UK, aren't playing venues where you can turn up a Fender Deluxe Reverb or Marshall Plexi.
When my guitar heroes were on the stage or in the studio, they didn't worry about whether anything they were using accurately reproduced the sound or feel of something else. They used what they had to get a sound and feel that inspired them. Even if that was just running directly into the desk. The important question has never been if X sounds like or feels like Y. You can get two Xs that came out of the factory one-after-another and they will sound and feel different. It is just finding something that sounds and feels good to you and then doing something with it.
But the bottom line is that your 'guitar heroes' didn't use digital simulations-the sound of a real amp is a big component of what makes them your guitar heroes.
@@lightningstrikes7314 The sound really doesn't change much IN A MIX, for the end user and the person listening unless you listen to guitar parts through guitar amps, bass guitar through bass amps, have speakers for the drums, keyboards, and vocals... you are never listening to what the artist is "feeling" so it is all a moot point.
Not even close!
Best comment
@@lightningstrikes7314 That's not even true for a big portion of the younger guitarist community - a lot of people grew up listening to the sounds of Modern Metal / Djent / Progressive Metal, which the majority of players in that style had already ditched tube amps. So for many Metal guys, the sound of their Guitar Heroes IS digital! \m/
Rhett Shull, Tim Pierce and a 3rd guitarist(maybe Pete Thorne) in a studio testing a UA(I think) plugin(s) that simulate a fender and Marshall amp and the studio had real Marshall and fender amps to compare. The console operator switched between the real and plugin with one of the guitarist playing and they would try to guess which was the plugin versus the real amp. It was pretty much a 50/50 chance of getting it right. It was an eye opener.
I agree the pedals sound good, but that video was sponsored by Universal Audio, so...
Rhett Shull is not remotely in the same league as Uncle Larry.
@@davidyelland908 or Tim Pierce or Pete Thorn.
But at least Tim and Pete have real credentials. Only Uncle Larry can press any buttons for me.
Rhett makes prettier looking videos and vastly superior click bait but…….
The highest percentage of player experience is always in the fingers. This is where digital always falls flat. Listening to them like this alone is always difficult
I played digital for decades (Kemper, Line6, Vox Tonelab) and switched back to tube amps a couple of years ago. I can totally live with playing digital and I liked it for years but I found out that I play very different on a tube amp. The response is totally different from a digital amp and it also forces me to play in a different way that I seemed to like over the digital amps. So Tom is right in that aspect. Listening at FOH you won't hear the difference between a tube amp and let's say a Kemper but playing wise you will.
Totally agree a generation of guitar players are missing out on the feel of non digital (valve particularly) amps. I've seen some of the greats who have tried digital and their playing is always diminished by the clinical response of modellers. The audience might not notice a difference in sound, however as a player I have to enjoy my show.
Before his death Dumble said, para phrasing here, digital is getting close to capturing the tone and feel of an actual amp and it's only a matter of time before it does, and it will eventually happen. This being said, if you can't achieve beautiful tones and create beautiful music from a simple set up like a Fender Princeton/Deluxe, Marshall or Vox with 2 or 3 classic pedals, all the digital gear and tone chasing will never make you sound great.
If you enjoy digital amp modelers and it makes you happy that’s all that matters in my opinion
This is the amp in the room versus mic'ed amp argument again. No one can reliably tell the difference when A/B'ing recorded sounds that are well dialed in. This has been shown over and over again. But they can definitely tell the difference standing in front of a real amp vs a modeler through a monitor/FRFR. Especially if they're the ones playing the guitar.
The amp sounds noticeably nice and more real
Except you'd never pick it out in a blind test.
Used Fender Twin - $750
Brand new Tonex ONE - $180
Yeah I’m good
Get the tonex now & the twin later! Best amp I've owned. It's what the 1000s of dollar amps aspire to be.
@ oh I was just using the Twin as an example, I have 0 interest in ever purchasing one😂
Tonex One can fit in your pocket. The Fender Twin could break your back.
If you were serious you would buy the Twin. Those who love guitar would do anything to get the right gear.
@@homemaintenance1234 owning antique and vintage gear is just a status symbol now. Prove me wrong. Nobody is making any hit records with that shit, and everyone and their brother play guitar nowadays.
What Tom is saying is true, but you gotta be in the room with the amp to experience that difference, and most of it is the cab and 12-inch speaker interacting with the amp-though tube saturation, compression, and “sag” are also perceptible. Beyond that, amps are quirky. They are inconsistent from day to day. They make funny noises, generate heat, and have electricity that is audible when amplified. Funny that sound engineers spent years trying to eliminate these sounds, but they are what make the amp “real.” It's a physical thing, and you need to live with an amp in your room that you use regularly to appreciate those nuances. Once it’s recorded, all of these points are (mostly) useless and people can’t hear an appreciable difference. No matter what, some people are gonna get religious about this stuff. It’s all relative and contextual and the application is what matters most. For Tom, in his garage, on a stage, in a professional sound studio, I have no doubt those differences are real and important. If it makes you feel and play better then it matters. Does the audience care? Yeah, probably not so much.
Exactly! I have played with a custom made high powered tweed for hundreds of gigs and it was amazing at the best of times. But sometimes it sounded completely different from gig to gig and overall I just found tube amps inconsistent for what I needed. In recent years I have valued a smaller form factor and a unit that is consistent from gig to gig that I still enjoy the sound of once I have dialled it in.
Especially now that silent stages are more and more common, having a tube amp behind me becomes kinda redundant when I had the sound coloured from a sm57 hung down over the speaker going into my IEMs. Never mind the whole weight factor, setting up, packing down ect...
I don't know why anyone would care what he thinks. We all have functioning ears, we all know what we like, that's all that should matter.
It's from an older Home Skoolin video. Who cares if you care, he cares about his craft and work and he knows what works for him. Maybe if you would work in his environment you would care as well.
@roberteismann1929 I'm not saying that if it works for him that's fine.
My point is why should anyone else care?
Whatever works for you isn't it?
Ah... The individual liberty nonsense that pretends what someone likes can't be c**p.
I dont even know him. If he doesn't write, record and release music or tour he doesn't count.
People care because they look up to him, and for good reason, he’s a top session player.
Not that his opinion is gospel, but he’s no average guitar player.
I dont care if it sounds like an old amp all anyone cares for is if it sounds good.
Tom may be describing the feel of the gear under his fingers in real time. No way he can hear a difference of the recording and probably not through a mixer/PA
Tom Bukovac hangs out with Kid Rock and thus his opinions are highly questionable at best.
Tom is right. Digital really starts to suck when things get loud. I use my Helix on quiet gigs but if I’m rocking out with a drummer I need tubes.
Why do you need tubes?
Lol no you dont. People use the AxeFx in arenas. I suggest you look at your setup. I also own nearly 10 tube amps and 5 solid state. I have no problem with any of them. Almost all high watt power amps are class D solid state.
@@matthewearl9824 Not Jimmy Vaughn.
@@FL-by9xz Did Jeff Beck ever use a Helix ? 🤣
@@imnotfishing You’re not Jeff Beck. If the reason you ‘need’ (your word) tubes is that Jeff Beck used them then that right there explains an awful lot about the state of guitar playing, and the guitar industry, today.
I’m sorry to say it because I do like Beck, and he has some legendary albums, but towards the end he was just a parody of himself. To be fair, you can probably say that about most artists granted a sufficiently long career.
Anyway, you didn’t answer the question. I suspect you don’t need tubes, you need a louder power amp for your Helix, whether it’s solid state, digital, or tubes. Your presets will sound different at volume - you can usually fix that with EQ.
When I play with my band where we use wedges and amps sitting on stage, I can absolutely tell the difference between a modeler and real amp cranked and sitting 6 ft behind me. When I play at church with no speakers or monitors on stage and everything running thru IEMs, I absolutely cannot tell the difference between a modeler and mic’d amp under the stage in an iso cab.
John, I think we can all agree that you are the Tom Bukovac of dialing in a tone. I haven't seen anyone who can get a modeler/profiler to sound exactly like the original gear like you can. Thank you for the excellent content, the entertainment, and the knowledge!
I’ve got tube amps both new and vintage and I’ve had a Kemper for years and have a Fractal and for recordings, I’m more than happy with using either and I’ve often recorded both on the same songs and when I listen back now, I can’t tell which was which. You’ve got to spend some time dialing in both and working through their strengths and weaknesses. The one issue I’ve noticed with all digital gear is that they’re not quite as sensitive to (or at least it’s just plain different) with how it responds to rolling back my guitars volume. Now for in the room sound, I’m a full stack guy all the way and a modeler into a PA just doesn’t have the live feel of real amps in the room but being able to tweak and “mod” amps on the fractal in ways I don’t have the skills to do with a real amp.
As a longtime Helix user, I’ve recently made the jump to Fractal. I noticed a huge improvement in the modeling in the Fractal world.
When I got my FM9, I created the same rig in my Helix rack and the FM9, the difference was beyond noticeable.
Could I dial in the Helix to sound like the Fractal? Possibly, but the feel and warmth of the new modeling technology in the Fractal was something I found more pleasing.
As for tubes vs modeling, tubes will always have that random nature and harmonics that modeling doesn’t have, yet.
Can you tell the difference when listening to a recording? We’ve all seen the shootouts and the overwhelming majority cannot tell.
In the end, do what makes you happy and don’t be bothered by what others think.
To be honest, if you are an artist creating your own sound and music… IT DOESN’T MATTER. I’m absolutely sure that if the Beatles or Jimi Hendrix were in their prime today… they would be using EVERYTHING available to make their music stand out 🎸 These are only tools. Merry Christmas to all of you
That is not the issue. Steve Vai has used digital recreations, but his sound is abrasive and he often looks to find jarring sounds. I think it highly unlikely that your heroes would use a Tonex for instance. They were indeed great precisely because they were driven by sound. Emulations of a thing are just that emulations. Sad wannabes have bought into the hype that we have seen many times now about emulations being as good as. With a few exceptions I do analogue only. There is an enormous difference. If you want to play 80s hair metal by all means, but then the sounds they produced were often rubbish. As it was very few were digital.
The part and your playing - 100% that's what matters. I've heard people with great gear who didn't play well enough for anyone who was only using their ears to know it was great gear. A better player plugs into the same rig with the same settings and suddenly it sounds amazing.
I'm a veteran tube guy who has been hardcore with Kemper for the past 5 years (LOVE it) and dabbled with HX Stomp (interesting but not loving as much) - if we are talking about recording, at this stage I think almost anyone would be hard-pressed to consistently win a blind listening test of the modelers/profilers vs. a real amp. The in-the-room live experience is a different thing, but I find the Kemper gear in particular comes close enough for me at the moment. No experience with QC or Tonex, but would not be surprised if people on those platforms have similar feedback to mine.
But for me, perhaps more important than the sounds, is the play feel, and interaction with the guitar/player. The immediacy of a guitar into real amp is hard to beat, but again, I think Kemper comes pretty darn close. HX, not as much - I find that with HX, the guitar responsiveness is a little softer, and I have to push a bit harder to get the amp models to react the way I want them to. Would be interesting to hear how these other platforms like Dream, QC, Tonex deliver on this point.
But I disagree with Tom's general argument that cheap digital technology won't ultimately do what the old stuff does - it's getting closer every day. Tubes will always have an allure, but today's tech is finally getting closer to replicating the magic - eventually they will close the gap IMO. I also think it's funny that people championing those vintage amps typically drive them with crappy, solid state OD boxes in front - so much for the tube mystique ;)
John - I really enjoy checking out your videos - keep'em coming :) Very insightful and appreciated.
My bottom line is: “Does it sound good? Am I able to get the type of sound that I’m looking for to get the job done?” I’m not so much into nailing a specific amp tone perfectly. However, I’m just one guy playing in a top 40 cover/party band.
Cheers!
I have to agree with Tom. I love digital amps and modelers. It's convenient, light weight, easy to use and sounds good enough. But when you sit next to a real Fender, Vox or Marshall, and run a modeler of the same amp. Always feels like something is missing from the modeler. I love my Catalyst CX, and all the other modelers I use for playing live and recording on the fly. But if I can, I am picking a real Fender Black Panel, Vox or Marshall.
By the time it’s filtered through the mic or the speakers or the DAW or the PA or your cell phone, it doesn’t matter. An amplifier might be a better experience for the player in the room, but from the listener standpoint, it couldn’t matter any less.
I’ve got two of the big dog Modelers. Both sound great in a mix, which is the most important thing. But-anyone that tries to sell you that they FEEL like a real amp is lying, have terrible sensory perception in their fingers, or they have no frame of reference.
They get close (I find it is depending on the model), but they aren’t quite there. There’s a certain “steely” quality about the touch of them, across all platforms I’ve tried/bought. There’s a certain response that a tube amp has that you can’t replicate fully without those glowing tubes in the signal path. You can’t take one of the primary components out of what makes a tube amp and expect it to sound like a tube amp. It’s a simple concept that people’s egos can’t handle.
That said, modelers are my favorite thing. They’re (generally) more cost effective, and VASTLY more valuable as far as form factor. But the next generation of them need to cut the crap and go tube front-end.
Thank you some common sense. The level of cope in these comments is sad.
Context is everything. Tom has the luxury of hearing his tones through very high end gear in an engineered environment. I have no doubt he can tell the difference. For mere mortals like me, anything that inspires me is good enough. It’s similar to the difference between a 5k custom shop and a 2k production guitar, the 3k difference amounts to a 3% improvement in quality. The value of that is a very personal choice.
I asked Tom once how he usually would set his amp. He wrote, dude I set it to where I like the tone. Play with the knobs. If you don’t like any of the choices sell it and buy something that you do like the tone.
Was it Josh from JHS who said, “If it sounds good, it IS good”? Well all of these sound just as good as each other to me.
In my living room I honestly couldn't hear a difference between them. But I wasn't using headphones - or playing the guitar myself.
If I was playing, maybe I would have been aware of a significant difference.
It's encouraging that the difference can now be so small.
But anything Tom says, I respect.
If I had younger ears and no tinnitus, it would no doubt help.
Buk and crew came to nyc, played on gear that could be found at your local guitar center. The nashville 3 all played travel-friendly partscasters, a few carefully chosen pedals, a deluxe reverb + sm57/E906. Sonically speaking, it was a tone junkie’s paradise. By far the best sounding guitar show ive seen since 1986. My hair stood upon my neck, and never went down. If you ever have the opportunity, its a bucketlist guitar experience. I.m.o. Todays digital modelers are not even the pimple on the asscheeks of what was sonically available since the late 1950’s
John found what we’re REALLY missing in the first couple minutes…The “Bukovac’s hands y brain” plugin!
Soooo… My CV includes: couple decades in vans and clubs, the occasional opening spot for a national act, a jazz degree, which qualifies me to work in any fast food restaurant on the planet and a quarter century of being a television and film composer. Thus, take anything that follows with at least a pound of salt. I’ve also served as a test pilot twanger to develop cabinet models for one of the big modeler companies. (was that obscure enough to not violate my nondisclosure?)
My first experience with the tone master deluxe model was one morning at guitar Center. The store was virtually empty. It was sitting right next to a deluxe with the big metal ingot (transformer) inside it and the glass bottles (tubes). I was able to get them to sound as close to identical as “my“ ears could get them within a minute or two. The only reason I didn’t buy it then was due to the fact the taper on the Reverb was impossible to adjust. (it was either too much or not enough. There was no way to find sweet spot!)
A a few months later, I saw Keith on 5 W world during a review of ALL of the deluxe models. (He had vintage, custom shop, and at that point the “upgraded“ version of the tone master version - the unit with the blonde cabinet and oxblood speaker cloth and celestion neodyminun speaker. Most of my attention went toward the upgraded tone master. I basically sat there watching the upgrades that they had made to the previous model go by. I was kind of bummed because I knew where there was a brand new one for merely $800 US. Then Keith mentioned: “if you’ve bought the earlier one and want these upgrades, there’s a USB jack in the bottom of the amp chassis!“ I immediately ditched my jammies and got in the truck to go buy the cheap one.
To me, the tone master series is a unicorn of sorts in the sense that it was truly designed to function in an analog realm. (Read: clubs with a mic or not. These days I play in rooms that the PA is only for the vocals) For my work in TV/filmland I generally used a mixture of mic’d amps and “models” (mostly stock Logic stuff) using the proprietary cabinet models I had access to.
I dearly love Tom and hang on every note and bit of wisdom he imparts but, once that little black tube is placed SOMEWHERE in the circumference of that speaker, that audio is about to be converted into a binary supposition. It’s the way of the world now…
So… here’s something I did long ago. One of the guitars is an amp with a 58 on it, the other is a model with cab model… I no longer remember which was which… (yammering at the front is Larry Mullins (Swans etc) being interrogated by Mike Watt (Minutemen , MSSV) in Portugal when they were the rhythm section for Iggy and the Stooges.
Hope it at least amuses…
John, you’re one of the brighter spots in the twang phylum! Thanks for all you do!
ua-cam.com/video/BOIMgYd_F5k/v-deo.html
The feel under the fingers is different, especially at higher volumes - sound and tone wise there may not be much difference but feel wise they will feel different especially when play loud.
You are totally proving Tom right
Well the only thing I'll say is that in the room. There's a difference. You can feel it in your chest when you're playing through a tube amp. A solid state or modeler there's just the sound. The sound is the same. It's just the feel.
No, some solid state work e.g. JC120. Very much depends the sound you want. Plenty of good ss amps. However, what we are talking about here is emulations I.e. imitations.
I have been gigging for 51 years, I have used Plexis, Twin Reverbs, Ac30s and many more (I currently have a Bogner Shiva 20th anniversary ,a Friedman Plex, PRS HDRX20, an ENGL Steve MOrse mini and an early 70s Champ. I would love to use these live but where I am quiet stages are the norm, even a cranked Champ is pretty loud. I currently favor the Fractal FM3 for my live work with one band and the Nano Cortex for the other, I am 68 and am still gigging twice a week and am currently rehearsing with 2 bands. I don't want to carry heavy amps to small gigs but would have no problem with using real amps in outdoor shows if they are practical. I have been using digital solutions for many years, are they as good as amps well that is a hard question to answer, they are designed to emulate a recorded amp and cab so it is not a realistic comparison. A real amp through a cabinet is not going to sound like the modeler through an FRFR OR PA when they are in the same room. In a recording on the other hand after all the processing, mixing and mastering et al are completed it would be virtually impossible to tell which guitar had used the real amp and which had used the modeler. I have recorded tracks that were done years ago and I know I used a Fender Supersonic on one track and my AXEFX 3 on another, I can't tell which are which. Realistically what it comes down to is what works for the individual, Tom works with real amps all the time and he is fortunate that he can do that, not everyone can.
I wish Tom would do some blindfolded tests, with some people who really know how to dial things in. I'm recently back into tube amps big time... but I've recorded a ton of music with all types of simulations over the past 15 years too. I too love the feel of the amp in the room and how it makes you play, but Tom listens as he plays ...on headphones... to the cab/amp in "another room" so he doesn't have that sensation that everyone points to. So if they could get a bunch of different digital stuff and a few amps coming back in the headphones... is it possible he might be able to play the same stuff with all of them? I have some wicked total sound presets in NDSP's Tone King amp and others that can make you really creative. Even Guitar Rig has some great presets. I use the Kemper a lot also. He should experience the best of those.
I’m 59 yrs old. Been around the amp/guitar block for 45 years. It’s all about laziness. There is a visceral difference and a purity of the beginning of the Fender/Gibson/Marshall era. Nothing will ever sound as good or as warm and real as those early amps/guitars. Just like the 50’s and 60’s muscle cars. Tell me an original Shelby Cobra isn’t the most pure form of driving experience? Everyone sits in front of
iPhones, computers, digital and E-everything. There’s NO argument. These modern modelers, Tesla cars, Social Media….they are efficient and time-saving and small. But ALL of it is disposable and artificial as is most popular music today. Ask Tom, he has to play the same 2-3 chord progressions every day and make them sound ‘different’ or exciting in each new arrangement. Human beings are not digital creatures. That Golden Era of design in automotive, music gear
And architecture for that matter…will never be topped for longevity. Tom is 100% right. Keep convincing yourselves that today’s watered down junk is something you’ll cherish for 70 years? It’s a shallow artificial and meaningless world of watered down junk spoon fed to the masses by corporate shrinkflation giants. The one issue that is tricky is that much of that vintage gear is unattainable due to the sentimental value placed on on these things. Most new guitars from Fender are junk…as are modern Amps. Kids can’t afford the older stuff and new stuff is not built to last. Last good vintage style fender guitars(AVRI)were made in 2016. Gibson on the other hand makes killer new Les Paul R8,R9 and R0 guitars that rival the originals. But $10,000? Not realistic for a young guitarist.
I agree we're being sold the digital narrative at the expense of quality. I think it's a lot easier for manufacturers to sell us digital things (easier to manufacture, takes up less or no physical space). Add the promise of "hundreds of amps in a tiny box" and people feel like they're getting a great value. They're the MP3s of guitar.
Bottom Line: End listeners care about the music you make, not the gear you used to make it. Tone doesn't matter to the listener once you get above "good enough". It's all about the song. As a player, those little differences, or playing in the room with the amp, may yield a better, more inspired take, but ultimately it's all about the notes you play.
I know this is a strange comparison, but I feel like it's sword vs. gun. When the firearm came along to challenge the sword, the concept of the chivalrous knight disappeared. Warfare before that had codes of conduct and honor - then the firearm came along and that was gone. The firearm gained the same result - elimination of the enemy. But something was lost. Now I don't condone use of either of those things, but there is a spiritual aspect of the amp vs digital thing that people don't consider. There is the "knowing" that it is digital - despite the tone and feel and those catch words.
Digital - as good as it is - will take some spirit out of music. It just will, for some people.Tone isn't everything, just as precision isn't everything (see Jimmy Page). The feel of the amp in the room, the way it vibrates off the body of an ES335 - hell, even the smell of the tubes cooking - all of that adds up in the experience, I think.
But yeah, digital SOUNDS fine. That may be good enough for some people.
If we all were searching for the most natural sounds from the instruments, wouldn't we all just play acoustic and not electric guitars? Electric are all mod'd via boosting the signal and so on. My advice, play what you like, through what you like as often as you like and, enjoy.
Was the pro reverb going through OX or through mics?
Whenever I watch this kind of discussion, I always think that please don't take away the opportunities for young guitar player to play real thing. I know the digital products are great these days and I can get why influencers like to discuss about this because everyone likes this discussion, but playing loud guitar amps and control it is completely different thing. And simply, it's fun.
Armature players doesn't need to think so much about versatility or portability or anything like that where professional musicians need to consider. I feel everything is commercialized too much these days.
Its what the audience hears what counts, an amp with mic in front, probably going to digital mixing desk controlled by other person, is more likely to get messed up and ends up digital anyway. Most modern bands now have inear monitors so not even hearing their amp on stage either.
Being in the same room and playing through a cranked tube amp - you can't currently match that let alone beat it. It makes you play differently which I've never achieved with digital. You play 'better'.
My 200w Catayst overpowered a Real drum kit with a heavy hitting death metal drummer in a rehearsal room using Helix
Isn't how it feels important ? A good tube amp feels different when your playing than something digital to me , some things just feel more lively when your playing, just as some overdrive feel more lively in your hands when playing , but yes they are extremely close in sound , but how it feels is the question
I mean, we are splitting hairs, aren't we? Tom is right it won't be the same thing. Maybe my ears are not trained after decades of playing through the gear he plays through but when I listen to your compares here, I can hardly tell the difference between the three. Closing my eyes and listening, actively, I can't tell when your video switches through them. At the end of the day if we enjoy the sound does it matter if it was created by a modeler or tubes? If it inspires us to play what is the big deal?
I'm sure Tom is right, but the difference is so small as to be irrelevant for me. He works on pro records with a budget. I doubt I can even mic up a DR and get a better sound than my Dream 65.
As someone who is just two years into my guitar journey after drumming for 30 plus years, I can tell you that while its on my list to get a tube amp in the next year, and I would love to explore a fully analog chain at some point, fully half my playing is in headphones late at night, and 95 percent of it is sat in front of my computer at this point so Tonex has been a lifesaver AND really helped me dial in what kind of physical amps I interested in.
The trouble is, most people wouldn’t know good tone if they tripped over it. I’ve been lucky enough to play through just about all the vintage Fender and Vox amps, and many boutiques.
Believe me, nothing compares.
I think the difference is that modeling doesn't sound like the amp, it sounds like the amp when it's recorded.
I just played another show with several bands. They had the horse and buggy pedals, patch cables, tube amp miced up, etc. I had the AXE 3. There is no comparison at shows anymore. I do not believe I sound better. I KNOW I SOUND BETTER. I went to the front and sat there for every band when I was not onstage. Not even close. And THEY SAID SO THEMSELVES. No buzz. No hiss. No patch cable degradation. No mic noise. We all know, move the mic one half inch, you just changed the sound. I would ask Tom, do you know better than Metallica? Or Neal Schon? Of course not. The days of grandad's TS9 through a stupid little amp are over. And good riddance. Its enough and time to move on.
Those of us without Bukovac's super-amazing ears really struggle. For example, I'm trying to match Bukovac's tone, and I'm not quite certain if he uses a 6-foot cable or a 10-foot cable. And just to make the point clear about how bad modellers really are, none of them to my knowledge have a setting for cable length. I think this really proves Bukovac's point.
If you listen to your playing and don't know when the switches are being made between each setup, you cant tell the difference at all. And if you can,. I bet you can't tell which one is which.
Front end analog back end digital…that’s my approach. When I use analog pedals for compression, drives, gain stages, and amp sims and digital modulation, delays, reverbs, cabinet sims. It maintains the FEEL of playing guitar and reacts properly with my pickups / volume pot.
Biggest difference (one I seldom hear discussed) is that modelling necessarily includes the microphone. What is modelled is a recorded sound, not the sound of an amp/cab in a room. I have played a Fender Junior on a session, had it break down and replaced with a Helix model. As I was playing in the control room but recording the Junior, loud, in the main studio, the replacement made virtually no difference. But modelling can never replicate the feeling of standing in front of and interacting with an amp in a live situation.
Dosnt matter how much you digital fans want it to be true it isn’t . Tom is right !
You genuinely can’t get the exact same tone .
I’ve used all the modellers and capture boxes out there and they definitely sound different .
They are close don’t get me wrong . Similar but they don’t react the same at all.
When capturing amp sounds we’ve used on records they sound so damn close when you play exactly the same part with exactly the same dynamics but as soon as you alter it in any way it falls apart !
Same as emulations of vintage gear . I have original 1073s and old vintage pultecs and 1176s and LA2As , the emulations are in a similar ball park but the UAD 1073 unison dosnt capture a microphone the same as a 1073, but also I have 9 channels of 1073 and there all different really . My 2 blackface 1176 sound different to each other 2 and they are the same revision and a year apart in manufacture date in the 70s
So it’s definitely a lot better than it used to be but it isn’t the same at all
But literally several amps can also sound different from one another... so splitting hairs on the 5% difference seems moot when there can be a 5% difference just between two amps.
I dare you to put a blindfold on and tell me the difference between my 1967 Fender bandmaster and my GX-100.
I find it is the feel. They are getting better, but not quite yet.
Sometimes I think life is too short to worry about such. :)
I think far too many people get emotionally invested in their gear choices and it effects their ability to think logically and critically.
Some times when I’m playing amp sims my guitar feels like a midi controller and using it to trigger pre recorded samples sounds from the amp plugin. There’s a real liveliness to real tube amps sounds most of my tone shaping takes seconds usually just turning the gain knob i can get many tones from tube amp versus a amp plugin it can take an hour of tweaking to get something usable tone from a plugin.
Guy with hundreds of thousands of dollars tied up in vintage gear asserts that it sounds totally unique from modellers. Obviously in a perfect world modellers will (at least one day, even if you don't believe it now) only sound 99.9% as close to that which they are modelling, but for 99.9% of guitarists and 100% of listeners they are indistinguishable.
I appreciate the time you spent to do this, very interesting. When Tom said that, it got me thinking about the unique sound & feel of tube amps, and this video really helped me to hear what Tom has been saying. The difference in the sound was actually quite shocking to me.
The Dream had more gain and high end, the Nano Cortex was dark, the real amp was clearer, warmer, and better sounding. At live volumes? I don’t think anyone would notice a difference. Nailing the riff is way more important than nailing the tone. In the US at bar gigs and outdoors a 1x12 amp is perfectly acceptable. A good attenuator really helps. I play once or twice a month at church in front of 500-800 people on a silent stage, and an iridium with delay and reverb afterwards sounds better than my Tone King in an isolation cab. Maybe if I had better mics than an SM57 and an e906 it would be different?
Tom would sound great playing through a cardboard box. He can use whatever he likes. Most of us aren’t in that position.
For me, I would love to use my Victoria bassman at the ideal volume on every gig! Sure. Reality is, I use a FM3 because it sounds better (!) at the volume I have to play at on many gigs and gives me all the tones I need. No one complains about my tone. Merry Christmas JNC. Enjoy
The nice thing about Tom (and others) is they always say they wouldn't use X/Y/Z but if you enjoy it and it fits your circumstances go for it. They never say you're less of a player for not using expensive/vintage gear
Tom most certainly looks down on people using modern gear.
@@Drtydeeds Well, maybe, sorta, kinda at times. But in Buk's defense everyone has a bad day every once in awhile. Plus, that cranky, old man stubborn affect starts to set in when you get over the hump in life. Not to mention you can't teach an old dog new tricks! Just saying...... ++Peace, Funk & Rock n' Roll 4 Your Soul My Friend++. 🤘😜🤘
Your music is how you feel. Period.
Use what makes YOU feel good.
I play three Marshall stacks. At home. Plus vintage pedals AND a modeler, an old Aria Pro II LP copy and a 2016 Gibson Std. and a 97 Fender Strat, a 85 Flying V with Kahler - yikes!
I couldn't care less if someone disagrees with my choice of gear.
I feel great.
Pure fun.
Tom is exactly right!!!
Look, the bottom line is a musical piece of equipment that’s heavy and will kill you if you stick your finger into the back of it cannot be compacted down to a little sissy piece of digital comfort.
Maybe it sounds good and is eq’d to compare to a certain amp but it’s not even close to the same thing!!
Tom is right. For recording, digital is now really close, but in the room it sounds like a valve amp, with a blanket thrown over it. Sorry, speaking as someone who has digital systems and valve amps that’s my honest assessment. Give it 10 years and I suspect they’ll crack it, but not yet.
It would have been good to do this exercise as an A/B/C blind test and see what people thought was what gear in each case (as well as which they preferred).
I mean, Tom uses a Line 6 M9 on his board. Granted, that's not an amp modeler, but that's still modeling and using tech that is far older than modern DSP stuff.
You may not be Tom, but that chord progression in your intro (was it improvised?!) is so lovely-very evocative, and a bit wistful. Re: "sounding like the real thing," one has to define one's goals. Is it to sound like the amp to the player in the room (which is not just about tone, but also about interaction with the player)? Is it to sound like the amp, recorded, and played back to a critical listener? Is it to sound good to a casual listener? Also, we're all trying to the best we can with the resources at hand, including money, time, supplementary equipment (mics, load boxes, a good room), expertise (in amp miking), etc.. Let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good enough. -Tom
For me digital sounds better.
I can barely ever tell the difference when it's recorded music being played back (videos or album tracks). It's all about being in the room and feeling/hearing the amp. I need that for when i play live and loud. Otherwise, digital is totally fine for recording/practicing etc. Actually recording is much easier with digital than trying to mic things.
I've had some time recently to get back into recording, and my opinions are as follows: I definitely like the "feel" and "sound in the room" of my real tube amp better than anything else, and I think that's what Uncle Larry is talking about more than recording - that and playing live, of course. I had the Dream '65 for about a day (someone got a hella good deal on Reverb) and I hated it. For recording various tones, and the variety, it's hard to beat the HX Stomp (or in my case, the Stomp XL). John's HX Stomp presets (so cheap and what a Christmas present!) are the best way to get started in getting great recorded tones and then being able to tweak them to make them your own. However, when I am playing through my studio monitors, it sounds/feels nothing like my real amp does, but I don't care - the recorded tone in the track is what matters to me, and my HX Stomp XL does the trick (and then some). Plus, being able to SAVE the exact settings in a preset and then come back the next day to do overdubs and not worry if knobs had been bumped makes it so easy. So, to summarize, when playing live or in my studio, I prefer the real tube amp for inspiration. For recording, the convenience and sounds of the HX Stomp XL are my way to go. Thanks for a great video, John, and Merry (Happy) Christmas to you!
When did you get the Fuchs? Let’s get a video about that amp!
The main component missing from all this Tom bashing is this: how does it sound in a BAND context & in a deep recording mix? That’s where the rubber meets the road. Modeling amps disappear to my ears in a live band setting. I used to do testing for a BIG company known in the modeling world. Once I compared the modeling rigs to my tube amps in my band, there was no contest. Even my bandmates were complaining about not being able to hear the modeling rig through the drums, bass, keys, and 2nd guitar rig. Facts.
I feel that the biggest difference between analog an digital is the dynamic response. So finding similar sound on a nondynamic sample, soft like You did in the start, or hard like the ToneX capture sample seems a bit flawed
I used to be anti-digital, but it is coming so close I can no longer dismiss it. Since I started using cab ir's I've been a convert. Modelling will eventually be indistinguishable at the rate it's going. I will never stop thinking abalog is cooler.
The real amp has more even order harmonics. You can hear a little bit of a fizzly crackle in the high end with the modelers. One thing is, clean and edge of breakup tones like this will always sound more convincing. It's usually higher gain settings where you can hear the crackly artifacts and lack of soundstage.
The fact of the matter is as soon as you place a mic in front of the cab, you are now playing a sample. If you aren’t in direct earshot of the cab itself, you are hearing an approximation of the real thing. Does it “feel” different from digital? Sure, but even that has become closer over the last few years.
I get the argument, but if I’m having fun, getting good tones, and my listener enjoys it, then it really doesn’t matter what the source is. 🤷♂️
John, my videos on my YT channel are currently (most recently) using the ME-90 Twin and a Headrush FRFR speaker all into an iPhone 13 microphone (live). I have a couple videos of using the UA Enigmatic into Logic. And they probably sound best. I have a Tone Master Twin and have had a real one in the past. The Tone Master is pretty sweet. But, I currently really like my ME-90 Twin choice and the Headrush speaker. Tom (Uncle Larry) is full of it. I've used it all because I've played for 58 years. And, I think the digital is very nice and I'm currently trying to work out my optimum gear for both live and recording. I'm really leaning on the ME-90 and my UA Dumble pedal. It's tricky and I've had weird issues with my interface but I really want the sound quality of my guitar into the Headrush.
It's all about what gear tools work for you. A lot of session players are like Tom with regard to real amps versus models. Both can do the job live or in the studio. You can't argue with Tom's success as a session player. Dan Huff would also be in that same category.
Of course Tom is right. BUT, the choices are: 1. Get a modeling setup for less and sound maybe 90% or more the same and have more effects right away, 2. Run out and spend 5-10k for an amp and some great pedals, or 3. Acquire traditional gear slowly over the course of 10 years or more and get a setup that way.
I chose number 3, that was my choice and I love it. Make your own choice, learn your instrument, and don't put down other people's choices whichever way they decide to go.
Just worry about playing and having fun.
The reality of it is you probably can't get the exact tone of a 'Black Face Fender' but that said no two amps sound the same regardless of if they have tubes or not. I know because I always run in stereo and when I was running two of the exact same amps (regardless of manufacturer) they sounded different from each other. The thing with 'digital' is not to think that your'e going to run your modeler into a 10" PA or FRFR and think you're going to get the sound of a 100W SLP running a 4X12 cabinet. You have to take into consideration what you're going to run it though and not just that, but rather than trying to get it to sound exactly like some other amp why not use the gear to get your own sound. Personally, I have much better results getting the sound I want using my Axe-Fx III into my Quilters rather than having two tubes amps and a pedalboard and worrying about if the tubes are going to crap out on the gig and then when you replace them it sounds like a totally different amp or something goes wrong with the pedalboard.
I think anyone who thinks a modeller sounds like an amp in the room is missing the point. This argument is old now. We all know what a modeller is and we all know what an amp is. Use what works for you.
Digital amplifiers sound too fizzy to me. I started playing in 1962. Started with surf music went to classic rock then to blues only in about 1973. Made a living at it for most of my life. Back then we played loud enough to get great tone out of 50 watt amps. Most of the younger players have not experienced that. So most are used to tone through pedals. And many are digital. When you convert analog sound to digital you lose a very large part of it harmonics and overtones that make the sound rich and sweet. My advice is get a tube amp and use an attenuator to get the volume down. I know they are heavy if you can't carry it go to the gym. I'm 75 now and I'm still carrying a super reverb to gigs. Cheers.
I never heard a band with modelers sound better than a band with real amps. I played both and I can assure you I went once at a gig where out of 8 band I was the only one using the cheap in-house tube amp and I literally mauled everybody else, my clean tones were crispier, warmer, better.
My solo tone was nothing that they could ever reach with a modeler, I'm sorry to upset a lot of modeler fanboys but if you don't believe me do a gig with a modeler and then do a gig with Boss Katana and it will be miles above even if it's not a tube amp
I thought of something else. Sorry. I bought my Harley Benton T-type guitar because of "Jon is TOO Loud", reviewer in Asia that can PLAY! His playing sold me on the guitar because I can play a bad guitar or amp and still make it sound good. I don't let the gear trap have a hold on me personally. I'll try things and I don't care what things cost or what other people think about it. I love my two new "cheap, non-vintage, brand-name" Harley Benton guitars and my "cheap?" Boss ME-90 and Headrush 2000watt? 8" speaker. The general listening population can't tell the difference. Most of the time, they don't ever mistakes that concern you, the guitarist.