FX/Amp modelling software vs the real thing

digitalscream

Emp_Fab said:

fields5069 said:

I know, completely different really, I realised after I posted but I'm told at work to mention everything I can think of, there are no stupid ideas etc. What a stupid idea!

With effectively limitless processing capabilities, if digital modelling can't replicate the real thing then there must be something going on inside a real amp which is unpredictable.

This is the key point for me.  I don't think it's a case of things going on that are unpredictable, but the sheer complexity of an analogue circuit that I have trouble believing can be accurately emulated.

It's not the complexity that does it; valve amps are pretty simple things, really...when they're operating within component tolerance. The problem is that guitarists are idiots, and that thing we love - overdrive and distortion - is deliberately running components way out of spec (which is why valves don't last long in such an amp). When you run anything beyond its designed tolerance, the normal rules break down and are replaced with something naturally more chaotic and consequently harder to model.

steer said:

Valves are one thing, but anything that was originally solid sate is basically silicon to start with anyway. 

The material used to make components is totally irrelevant. The difference is between analogue and digital technology, and that's huge.

Sporky

Emp_Fab said:

To do that for multiple amps... with multiple cabs.... and multiple effects... all of which interact in many different ways seems like an impossible task.

One does not eat an elephant in a single bite.

I would expect that the amps are modelled in blocks; so you break the task down. What does the input stage do? It presents a high impedance to the previous stage, it removes any DC offset, and it probably has a non-linear frequency and phase response. Each can be modelled. Perhaps it is possible to overdrive the input stage; that can be measured on a real amp and then a model created for that behaviour.

Models don't have to be one dimensional either, you can create a two or three dimensional model so that the amp reacts differently to more complex incoming signals, or differently to its current input based on its last input.

The trick is to break it into manageable little bits, and then manage the interaction between the bits.

I find it hard to see how a smart phone works, especially if you include the network behind it, and the inferwebz behind that. But I can look up how the screen detects where I'm touching it and understand that bit. I can look up how a CPU works in general terms, and I can look up app development.

At some point, though, there is more in the thing than one person can fully understand. That's OK.

normula1

So I've been playing with modelling via PC for the past couple of days.I had enough time to rule out Helix Native.
What I then did was have a play with Cantabile and some free VST plugins along with the ones I get bundled with the Focusrite interface I have and a couple of Celestion IRs I bought.

I got some pretty good results and was changing presets using a MIDI footswitch which is something the cheap version of Bias can't do and I believe Helix Native doesn't do yet.
I then fired up my normal gear this morning, and you know what, the modelled stuff through phones sounded massively better for a clean tone and the moddeled drive tones were at least as good.

I'll not be ditching the normal gear but will be having a really good tweaking session soon

Fretwired

digitalscream said:

Helix Native is the only one that's come close, in my experience, and it's way too expensive to be considered with the others. Amplitube's fairly crap, as is Guitar Rig, and BIAS...it's a massive turd as far as I'm concerned. They have loads of fanboys due to the sheer size of their marketing budget (getting lots of prominent YouTubers to promote it, thus instantly converting their fans to BIAS fans).

The question is...does accuracy really matter? There's a solid argument for using your ears instead of your eyes. It's possible to get a passable tone from Amplitube, and slightly less so for Guitar Rig. There are lots of decent VSTs out there, too - the LePou plugins are stellar for getting the tones you want (there's plenty of range there), but they shouldn't really be considered in comparison to the real thing; the "name" on the plugin really just gives you an idea of the rough features that are implemented and the levels of gain that you're going to get.

I beg to differ regarding Amplitube - with all this stuff it depends on what tone you're after. The Fender 2 pack for Amplitube is far more realistic than the Helix Fender models. I have two Fender tube amps which Amplitube model and can say they are very close, and having used Helix over the weekend I was somewhat disappointed. Sounded very similar to the POD HD. I can't comment on the high gain models as I don't use them and I don't have the Amplitube Messa pack. Ola Englund rates it though.

I wouldn't say any product is crap - it's horses for courses and at the end of the day once a guitar is in a mix with additional processing and EQ I think 99.9% of the normal population and a lot of the cork sniffers wouldn't know.

People used to rant about the POD 2 but it got used on zillions of albums.

Drew_TNBD

The Amplitube Mesa pack was the most disappointing thing since my son.

stratman3142

Fretwired said:

I beg to differ regarding Amplitube - with all this stuff it depends on what tone you're after. The Fender 2 pack for Amplitube is ...

I have to agree about the Amplitube Fender 2 pack which I really like a lot.

I'll avoid getting into what sounds the more realistic because I'm unable to do detailed comparisons with the originals. I have had the experience of playing through an original (not a Fender) and it didn't sound as good as I imagined it might.

guitarfishbay

I'm pretty underwhelmed with the Native Mesa models, the sounds are ok but the dynamic response/feel doesn't work for me. Playing through the Fractal Mesa models it's a non contest for my tastes, probably the same way Digitalscream feels about the Soldano models in everything except the Helix. 

I like the tone of the Archon though, which can cover similar ground.

They all have strengths and weaknesses IMO. I don't like the Fractal SLO models to be honest, but I've never played a real one to know how close it is, or if I'm using it wrong. I just use other models instead 

Fretwired

Drew_TNBD said:

The Amplitube Mesa pack was the most disappointing thing since my son.

I can't comment .. never used and have no interest in doing so .. Ola Englund likes it though ...




He seems to like it .... not my thing ... :-)

Cirrus

Emp_Fab said:

...so users have no real way of knowing whether the sound their getting from the modelling app is even remotely close to the real thing.

...we have no way of knowing whether the sound we're hearing is spot on or nowhere feckin near it !  ...I find it difficult to believe that I'm listening to what a real Bognor amp sounds like to begin with, but to tell me this is what it would sound like with a 12AX7 instead of a 12AT7 ?  Really ?  Hmmmmmm.

OK, this is a common thought when trying to compare tones.

But, there's no such thing as the definitive, real sound of an amp. That's a concept that doesn't exist in the real world. Take a real amp. Put it in a room with you. It sounds like it sounds. Is that the real amp sound? Move the amp over to the other side of the room. It sounds different. Stand close to the amp, now stand over on the other side of the room. Sounds different. Put it in a different room. Sounds different. Ok, let's close mic it, remove the room/ listening position from the equation.

Which mic to use?

Where to position it on the speaker?

Amp's position in room *still* effects the sound through the mic.

Get two of the same amp model side by side. They're likely to sound slightly different.

Put the same amp in the same place, day after day. Never change the settings. It'll sound different on Tuesday to how it did on Saturday because your hearing changes over time based on all kinds of environmental factors. And even if you dismiss the psychological aspect of it, on Saturday the wall voltage was at 250v, it's dropped to 240 on Tuesday because the factory down the road is in use.

So there's no real, definitive sound of the amp that a modeller can be stacked up against.

There is only your perception of the sound. That's what's real, and it changes all the time. If a modeller gives you a sound you can work with, it's done its job.

Fretwired

Interesting .. for metalheads ..

digitalscream

Fretwired said:

Drew_TNBD said:

The Amplitube Mesa pack was the most disappointing thing since my son.

I can't comment .. never used and have no interest in doing so .. Ola Englund likes it though ...




He seems to like it .... not my thing ... :-)

I have the same problem with Ola's demos as I do with Fluff's (well, aside from the fact that Fluff seems to do a positive review on anything as long as he's paid...see the "these power cables reduce the noise floor in my studio...I won't measure it, but trust me it's amazing" thing which was when I unsubscribed). They both make every amp, every pedal and every bit of software sound exactly the same.

While it can be argued that it's a positive thing when it comes to software, there's so much post-processing going on that it's practically impossible to work out what's the stuff being reviewed and what isn't.

guitarfishbay

Ola's tone has changed a lot over the years. He's been going for a super tight Dimebag with valves kind of vibe in recent times, but he used to be a Recto player and his Recto demo videos sound pretty awesome.

I actually think the Amplitube Mesa Mark IV model is pretty decent. More plug and play than the Helix one (and yes I know how to use the two EQs). The Fractal model is still nicer, for my tastes. Ola did a blind test of Mark models from hardware modelers and I blind picked the real amp and Fractal models as my favourites IIRC, there's a thread on here somewhere, very few people actually commented while the test was blind if I remember right.

The Amplitube Mesa Rectifier models didn't really do it for me. Fractal do my favourite Recto models by far.

guitarfishbay

Here you go

professorben

My take is. 
Does it matter?
Take 10 60's Twins, they will all have a slightly different sound due to component drift, how they have been cared for etc etc. 

If it sounds good, tick!
if it also feels good, bonus tick!!

Fretwired

professorben said:

My take is. 
Does it matter?
Take 10 60's Twins, they will all have a slightly different sound due to component drift, how they have been cared for etc etc. 

If it sounds good, tick!
if it also feels good, bonus tick!!

Give him a wis .. tick!!

Drew_TNBD

professorben said:

My take is. 
Does it matter?
Take 10 60's Twins, they will all have a slightly different sound due to component drift, how they have been cared for etc etc. 

If it sounds good, tick!
if it also feels good, bonus tick!!

Yeah definitely this. That's why to some extent comparing modellers to one another is a bit pointless.

octatonic

Drew_TNBD said:

professorben said:

My take is. 
Does it matter?
Take 10 60's Twins, they will all have a slightly different sound due to component drift, how they have been cared for etc etc. 

If it sounds good, tick!
if it also feels good, bonus tick!!

Yeah definitely this. That's why to some extent comparing modellers to one another is a bit pointless.

I'd is why I tend not to do A/B demos and I hardly ever bother for my own use.
I don't usually need replicas- I just want things that sound good.

I did an SSL G Bus compressor comparison yesterday (not a video, just for myself) and ultimately came to the conclusion that they were all different, all had their uses in different situations.

If I was trying to make a classic guitar album with plugins and modellers then maybe I'd give a shit, but I'm not.

If I found myself making a classic guitar album I'd get probably save myself a shit load of time and just use the hardware versions.

Fretwired

Drew_TNBD said:

professorben said:

My take is. 
Does it matter?
Take 10 60's Twins, they will all have a slightly different sound due to component drift, how they have been cared for etc etc. 

If it sounds good, tick!
if it also feels good, bonus tick!!

Yeah definitely this. That's why to some extent comparing modellers to one another is a bit pointless.

However .. I think what @guitarfishbay is doing is valid. He has the amps, an Axe-fx and is looking at using software sims with an idea of the sound and dynamics he's after. That's why I won't slag off Helix Native or Amplitube or S Gear. It's down to what you want. I like the Amplitube Fender amps - someone else will prefer the Helix Fender amps. That's OK. Being able to try different bits of software is really useful.

You like Helix and it does what you want - I respect that. I've heard your tone and it's good and suits the style of music you play. I'm more a blues/jazz kind of guy.

Clarky

answering Emp's original question.. modelling v the real thing..

I've not owned many amps cos I went to rack stuff from the early 90's
and I've not played through a huge number of amps for real either..
also, my first 2 rack units were not modellers..
the Roland GP-16 seemed to me to be a pile of Boss stomps in a rack with nice MIDI control
the 2120 is a real valve preamp with an extremely nice digital fx back end
so I'll only mention the amps and modelling units I've had / know pretty well..

Roland VG-99: it's a full-on modeller..
the models are far from spot on.. more like an approximation..
for example, the JCM800 [which I know for real] is clearly from the same 'tone family' but in the VG it's missing something..
it lacks the JCM's aggression and bite.. it's also very stiff feeling..
the higher gain amp in there are also approximations but can be a little 'kazoo like" in the highs..

The Helix is much closer..
the Engl and 5150 models sound very close to the real thing.. 
but the feel is missing a little.. 
it's as if that are a very good caricature if the real thing.. you have to pump them up with lots of input level to get them going..

the Axe-Fx is a whole different animal..
the JCM800, 5150 block, 5153 [all channels], Diesel Herbert [all channels] are exactly how I remember them in in all aspects..
absolutely stunningly so..
the AC30 is just how I remember it too [although my access to a real one was limited]
the MKIIC is just as nasty as the one I played in a shop once
the VH4 channels 2 and 4 as absolutely spot on.. but channel 3 is not.. the sound is exactly right but the feel of that channel has been elusive..

in software I also have GTR and Guitar Rig..
modelling wise, both are utter shite.. fx wise though they are great

when it comes to modelling, the Axe is superb in sound and feel for the majority of amps I know reasonably well

Drew_TNBD

Fretwired said:

Drew_TNBD said:

professorben said:

My take is. 
Does it matter?
Take 10 60's Twins, they will all have a slightly different sound due to component drift, how they have been cared for etc etc. 

If it sounds good, tick!
if it also feels good, bonus tick!!

Yeah definitely this. That's why to some extent comparing modellers to one another is a bit pointless.

However .. I think what @guitarfishbay is doing is valid. He has the amps, an Axe-fx and is looking at using software sims with an idea of the sound and dynamics he's after. That's why I won't slag off Helix Native or Amplitube or S Gear. It's down to what you want. I like the Amplitube Fender amps - someone else will prefer the Helix Fender amps. That's OK. Being able to try different bits of software is really useful.

You like Helix and it does what you want - I respect that. I've heard your tone and it's good and suits the style of music you play. I'm more a blues/jazz kind of guy.

I think you might be confused. Max doesn't have any amps anymore, he just has the Axe FX and a Matrix SS poweramp, and two 2x12 Mesa Boogie recto cabs. It's a rig I really want to play through, because I'm very curious about it. Clarky has a similar setup but he uses two 4x12 Marshall cabs. When I played through that rig, it sounded very amp like.

But when I had an Axe and a Marshall Valvestate poweramp, I couldn't get it to sound as good as my real amps.. which was a bit of a kick in the balls.

I use the Helix just for effects 90% of the time. I use the amp modelling for demos at home, but would prefer to record with a real amp. When you've got choices like these, it would be silly not to!


I certainly don't need to spend money on amps anymore!! Maybe cabs....