Adjusting Amp Sim for Mix

thegummy

One of the advantages of using a plugin amp sim for recording compared to recording a real amp or using a hardware amp sim is that potentially the parameters of the amp can be adjusted after the fact or even during the final mix of the song.

Does anyone here actually do this?

Theoretically it seems like a big benefit but I wonder how often it would actually be that useful in the real world.

guitarfishbay

All the time.  I try to get the sound as close to done when I'm tracking but it can be necessary to tweak things slightly, so having access to the complete chain involved in the tone can be very handy and save loads of time reamping

Musicwolf

Same here.  I record with a Kemper.  I get somewhere like the sound I think that I want (if I'm recording songs as I write them then it can be difficult to know how you want the final sound to be) and record the Kemper along side a DI track (you can take a DI straight from the Kemper).  I can then re-amp through the Kemper.  It also means that I can record with effects but then re-amp dry and apply plug in effects during the mix or re-amp twice with different profiles.

stratman3142

Yes. As stated above, I track with a sound that fits the track, then tweak afterwards. It's quite rare that I change the ampsim completely.

tekbow

Re-amping lets you do the same with actual amps.

Cirrus

It really depends how you approach things. I quite enjoy the "thrill" of commitment - tracking the sound I want makes me approach things definitively, tracking a DI means I can quickly fall down the rabbit hole of infinite guitar rig tweaking afterwards, and at least in my experience that usually leads to a loss of perspective and forgetting my original intent sooner than I find the perfect tone for the track.

But, that's just me. Lots of people re-amp or change virtual rigs etc and get great results.

stratman3142

One advantage of recording the dry signal (at least without reverb or delay) is that it's easier to do very tight edits and drop-ins.

PolarityMan

I only rarely go back and tweak the amp sim. In theory if I wanted to for example fit the bass guitar distortion into the rhythm guitar distortion using filtering I could go and  adjust the bass control on the amp sim or tweak the tone on the tube scremer sim, or put on an EQ pedal in the front but its much easier just to fire up pro-q2 and do it with filters. 

I would say though that my guitar tones aren't total nonsense to start with. 

WiresDreamDisasters

Cirrus said:

It really depends how you approach things. I quite enjoy the "thrill" of commitment - tracking the sound I want makes me approach things definitively, tracking a DI means I can quickly fall down the rabbit hole of infinite guitar rig tweaking afterwards, and at least in my experience that usually leads to a loss of perspective and forgetting my original intent sooner than I find the perfect tone for the track.

But, that's just me. Lots of people re-amp or change virtual rigs etc and get great results.

This is me too.

I take a DI for safety-sake, and it has saved my bacon a few times. But in the main I like to commit as early as possible, so that when it comes to the final mixing stage, I'm not constantly second guessing myself. I mean, I second guess myself anyway, so that's bad enough without also having to think "maybe the amp isn't dialed in right??" ... screw it. Commit.. deal with it using EQ later on if there is a huge problem.

thegummy

Cirrus said:

It really depends how you approach things. I quite enjoy the "thrill" of commitment - tracking the sound I want makes me approach things definitively, tracking a DI means I can quickly fall down the rabbit hole of infinite guitar rig tweaking afterwards, and at least in my experience that usually leads to a loss of perspective and forgetting my original intent sooner than I find the perfect tone for the track.

But, that's just me. Lots of people re-amp or change virtual rigs etc and get great results.

That's a good point - I think there's definitely a lot to be said for committing to sounds while making a record. Not just guitar amp sounds but other sounds as well.

There's the obvious temptation with DAWs to leave everything editable til the very last second but there are drawbacks to that.

I feel that the idea of keeping everything just to be safe makes sense when recording others, particularly well known players, where if there's a problem then it causes issues. But I think I would only bother about keeping the options open if I was at least semi-regularly tweaking the amp sim as part of the mix. If it was just the rare occasion there was an unexpected issue I could always just re-record it (not like I hate playing the guitar lol).

Thanks for the replies - it's useful to know that a few of you do regularly tweak during the mix, there must be something to it. The main consideration for me is the battle against latency. If I want to overdub a guitar part late in the tracking, there could already be a good few instances of real-time amp sims running as well as everything else in the mix. Having said that there is always the option of "freezing" the tracks to get the benefit of printing while keeping the possibility of "unfreezing" to tweak.

PolarityMan

thegummy said:

Cirrus said:

It really depends how you approach things. I quite enjoy the "thrill" of commitment - tracking the sound I want makes me approach things definitively, tracking a DI means I can quickly fall down the rabbit hole of infinite guitar rig tweaking afterwards, and at least in my experience that usually leads to a loss of perspective and forgetting my original intent sooner than I find the perfect tone for the track.

But, that's just me. Lots of people re-amp or change virtual rigs etc and get great results.

That's a good point - I think there's definitely a lot to be said for committing to sounds while making a record. Not just guitar amp sounds but other sounds as well.

There's the obvious temptation with DAWs to leave everything editable til the very last second but there are drawbacks to that.

I feel that the idea of keeping everything just to be safe makes sense when recording others, particularly well known players, where if there's a problem then it causes issues. But I think I would only bother about keeping the options open if I was at least semi-regularly tweaking the amp sim as part of the mix. If it was just the rare occasion there was an unexpected issue I could always just re-record it (not like I hate playing the guitar lol).

Thanks for the replies - it's useful to know that a few of you do regularly tweak during the mix, there must be something to it. The main consideration for me is the battle against latency. If I want to overdub a guitar part late in the tracking, there could already be a good few instances of real-time amp sims running as well as everything else in the mix. Having said that there is always the option of "freezing" the tracks to get the benefit of printing while keeping the possibility of "unfreezing" to tweak.

One trick I sometimes use if I'm feeling lazy (cos tbh i rarely run into cpu issues in a tracking phase) is to run the amp sim on a bus or folder track then you can just chop out the bad bit and do your overdub underneath. Obviously most DAWS will also allow you to punch in and create additional takes so what you had there before isn't truly lost. 

I do prefer to separate mixing and tracking / writing though. When I'm mixing I typically bounce out to actual audio so i'd want to make sure any overdubs were done by that point. 

Nerine

I use whatever I tracked to begin with. Modern workflows allow you to be too non-committal, IMO.
I usually find impulse is very important when talking about creativity.

I find my best work is often the more "rushed" It always has more character, vibe, energy. etc.

I'll usually commit effects (or record guitar parts with fx committed) very early on.

I think it's very easy to sterilise a performance/mix by endlessly tweaking to find the "perfect" sound. 

Sometimes the perfect sounds are the ones that aren't endlessly pored over and tweaked.

With it all being subjective anyway, the minutiae is really quite irrelevant. 

So I'd much rather turn out a mix that captures the mood and purpose of the track than one which is arguably technically superior. But hey ho, I do use both approaches. Sometimes things do need to be clinical. 

Usually if a song is great and the parts all work well together, you just end up working fast anyway. It comes together very quickly. It's the huge sessions with conflicting parts and tones that require a more fastidious hand to piece it together.

Simple is usually best in my mind. Get the essence of the song and hammer it home. 

p90fool

I always record a DI'd guitar too with other peoples' songs in case there's a big change of direction imposed on me at a later stage, but for most guitar-based music I find the guitar tone was the bit which inspired me, so I'll just print it, sometimes even with a room reverb. 

I'm terrible for having option paralysis, sometimes I need to force myself into an early commitment. 

andy_k

An interesting variant on this, is to turn down the clip gain of a di, pre amp sim. I tried it a few times to simulate the effect of turning up / down the volume knob on a guitar into an amp. If a section felt too hot during a verse, it allowed the amp sim to sound a little cleaner, and then the clip gain was adjusted up for the chorus. A bit different to volume automation on the final track.
It depends on the accuracy of the VST, but it seemed to work well for me on Overloud THU.

Danny1969

I tend to print the pre amp of a valve amp DI'ed  to track but then re amp that back out to the power amp section of the amp and re-record it mic'ed ... sometimes not the same amp, sometimes it could be my HRD pre amp sent back out into the Marshall. 
The advantage of this approach is you can spend hours getting a perfect take for a 3 minute song with the pre amp printed and then you know it's only take 3 mins of loud valve amp to print the power amp mic'ed up. You can leave that 3 minutes until everyone is out or any other time that's good. 

nonesuch

When I'm starting to put together a new track, I almost always load up a basic amp sim preset and record my guitar part without really altering anything. Then I go in and start adjusting the settings. At the writing stage I usually want to get any ideas down as quickly as possible, before I forget them. With Amp sims (in Logic Pro anyway) I find it a bit harder to get the sound I'm after, than if I was using a 'real' amp and pedals. Then when I add more instrumentation I'll probably go and tweak the settings a bit more. Personally I love that way of working, it gives you so many possibilities (but yeah, probably too many).

octatonic

thegummy said:

One of the advantages of using a plugin amp sim for recording compared to recording a real amp or using a hardware amp sim is that potentially the parameters of the amp can be adjusted after the fact or even during the final mix of the song.

Does anyone here actually do this?

Theoretically it seems like a big benefit but I wonder how often it would actually be that useful in the real world.

Virtually never.
I pull the sounds at the source and I work a lot quicker because of it.
I can always play it again if I have to.

I do take a dry DI but most of the time it never gets used.
I think it sounds better to track at the source.