It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Ebay mark7777_1
I have a pair of kemper kones and a power amp now and it feels much more accurate.
Our bass player puts his Helix through a Headrush FR112. The low end in that is possibly a bit hyped but it works well for bass. Having said that he would prefer something a bit more portable and is thinking of also getting a DXR10.
is it crazy how saying sentences backwards creates backwards sentences saying how crazy it is?
I've had both but the weight of the 212 was a hindrance for gigging.
is it crazy how saying sentences backwards creates backwards sentences saying how crazy it is?
That said, I'm gonna go to separate power amp and guitar cab, I think. I prefer the sound of guitar speakers and I think that's where the battle is won or lost with modelling.
I'd rather listen to a guitar cab than an FRFR monitor with an IR of that cab. It seems counter intuitive to me, otherwise. Almost like being in the room with the Mona Lisa and deciding to look at it through a camera on your phone instead.
A 1x12 cab isn't taking up a lot more real estate than some of the FRFR solutions, anyway.
I'm starting to form the opinion that IRs are the weak link in the modelling ecosystem.
Running any of the amp models without IRs or cab blocks etc into the FX return of my Friedman combo makes any of the models sound like an amp in the room, because it effectively is.
Everything seems a little more dynamic like this, too. I think IRs are a bit dynamically static and this part in the chain is a bit of a weak one, IMO.
I think this is actually where a lot of modelling users go wrong. They think they "need" a Fender clean verse, Vox mid gain bridge and Marshall crunch chorus all in the same patch "because tone" but personally, I have pretty much everything setup based around one core sound or a very similar variation of one if I utilise amp channel switching in a preset. I'll switch from a Diezel channel 2 to a Diezel channel 3, but more rarely do the cliched Fender clean to Marshall Crunch thing. It's far less likely to sound wonky in a mix at points or get lost or whatever if a manageable amount of frequency responses is used.
If I want to try a different amp, I'll change the whole shebang to the new amp and save it to a new preset. I also will not switch between presets at gigs. I stay on the same one.
Consistency is key for me.
Everyone else's mileage may vary, of course.
Collision rock band
I use FRFR but I often use the same IR for clean and dirty tones, or at least another IR from the same cab files so it is really only the difference in mic placement for clean and dirty.
Sometimes I think the approach of swapping from a Jazz Chorus to a boosted Recto is a bit jarring, no matter how well Hetfield did it.
Maybe it is because my first 30 years of gigging was just an amp and some pedals, but I usually build my patches with the same thing in mind. While there is no within-amp channel switching in Helix using 2 different Marshall amps effectively as different voiced but still Marshall channels does that job well.
I really like the latest Helix update with the new cabs / IRs and I'm using them a lot, but if not - it's Celestion's own IR of the G12-65 for almost everything. It's a great sounding speaker, and as it happens it's my favourite in real life too.
I’m so bored I might as well be listening to Pink Floyd
Being able to replicate that, relatively cheaply and much more conveniently is a huge benefit. But it needs FRFR or direct to the desk.
I've spent hours today with a guitar half stack and a JBL PA, A/B-ing the two setups in an attempt to get them to sound identical, and I'm getting fairly close, finally. I have the Amp Out on the POD set pre-cab sim, obviously.
I'm really not bothered about IRs live, I never get enough full volume sound check time to audition them.