9 ms·

For people who don’t play guitar, this is really commonplace technology now. Engineers worked out how to model the circuit behavior of any amp a while ago. Powe

by w0mbat 6y ago

For people who don’t play guitar, this is really commonplace technology now. Engineers worked out how to model the circuit behavior of any amp a while ago. Powerful valve guitar amps have really interesting effects on the waveform particularly when driven hard, but that valve technology is expensive, unreliable, bulky, and very loud when producing some of the most sought after tones. The most popular guitar amps now are all solid state, but the internal computer digitizes the guitar signal, then processes it in the digital domain, doing eq, applying the “sound model” of an old amp of your choice, also applying effects like chorus and reverb at the same time. Then the D to A convertor feeds the resulting signal to a neutral transistor power amp circuit to the speaker, at as low a volume level as you want. The BOSS Katana range or the Fender Mustang GT range are both very popular. They are good value, sound great, and can sound like anything from a Fender Twin Reverb to a Marshall stack set to 11. All without shattering your neighbor’s windows.

MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
Is latency an issue?
- joeel84 6y ago
  Yes.
- mhh__ 6y ago
  Latency can be an issue if you are playing through a desktop computer or laptop, but its very manageable (for the most part) if you set up your buffers right. I have never ever noticed any latency issues with any physical hardware, even for equipment from years ago.
  - o-__-o 6y ago
    A lot of hardware audio interfaces were usb2 which demands cpu time as the system has to poll the usb device rather than act on an interrupt. This caused very low latencies to basically never work without dropouts. I can distinguish a 20-30ms latency and above that it becomes too difficult to ply anything meaningful. Even my semi-pro tascam interface could only sample between 11-14ms. Faster cpus over the last 5 years and ultimately Usb3 solved the polling problem but is just now picking up traction in newer devices due to the usb-c connector.
    - klodolph 6y ago
      The complaint about CPU time is interesting—surely the whole point is that you want to spend CPU time more often? Then again, it’s been a long time (15 years?) since I’ve seen dropouts, and I’m definitely using USB2 (not USB3) and low buffer sizes (more like 10-15ms, not 20-30ms).
    - MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
      Interesting, I thought in general polling was lower-latency at the cost of higher CPU utilization. But maybe its not really true for USB.
- keyth72 6y ago
  Second Yes. I would not play this at a live gig myself, but it does run fine on my Acer laptop with i5 processor, which is not meant for serious audio processing. If you try it and are getting latency issues, try adjusting the sample rate. Also the stand alone app seems to run much slower than the VST plugin, but most people interested in this I expect would use the plugin anyway.
  - o-__-o 6y ago
    Get a usb3/usb-c audio interface. Focusrite or presonus are the current favorites. Usb3 does not have the polling problem which cactuses dropouts. Another simple fix is switching to a real-time kernel when using jack (big assumption you are using Linux heh)
- hannasanarion 6y ago
  For purpose-made hardware, basically never. If you're doing all of the emulation and signal processing on a general-purpose computer, then sure, you often run into latency problems, and part of the set up process for those software tools is latency calibration. The one that I use when at my desktop, Guitarix, is very conservative with its latency, defaulting to like 500 milliseconds, I turn it down to 20-30 or so and it still functions on my hardware and you can't tell the difference: it's the same time delay as playing through a speaker 20 feet away.
dyeje 6y ago
> The most popular guitar amps now are all solid state Maybe on the low end of the market, but tube amps still reign supreme for most serious players.
- notahacker 6y ago
  There are plenty of touring musicians using Kemper digital models of their tube amps or Helix/AxeFX
  - hashkb 6y ago
    I just returned a Helix because of lackluster... everything. I'll try modelers again in a few years. I think of tube amps a lot like I think about Vim.
    - 52-6F-62 6y ago
      I want to preface by saying I love playing with music instrumentation and other audio software and it’s long been on my list to learn more to play with ideas much like OP so hats off to Keith for releasing this software. But as far as guitar instrumentation goes— I have a lot of respect for good solid state amplifiers—think Roland Jazz Chorus—that are not modelling another sound but a very intensively tuned original instrument. As for physical, electrical amplifiers versus a software emulated version I just can’t see the point in using one outside of the [potential] convenience. Now, if your goal is to take that signal and twist it into something new altogether that’s different. But if I want to sound like an AC30 I don’t know why I would use something like hats just trying to sound like an AC30 versus something that is and AC30. Lacklustre has always been my experience. Like leaving a tube amp too quiet—not saturating the tubes. It just tends to sound dull.
      - hashkb 6y ago
        Outside of "convenience" they're attractive for the flexible routing and parameterization. I can only realistically deploy 4 tube screamers and a handful of delays before someone notices they're all set almost exactly the same way. I'd love to replace the combinatorics with presets, and although MIDI routing is an option, it sure would be nice if a compact reliable digital solution sounded good. So that's why I want it to be good... But it's not.
qppo 6y ago
A decent tube amp is not significantly more expensive than a decent modeling amp, particularly considering the used market. They're also just as "bulky" as a solid state amp - the heaviest components are the power transformer and drivers. When you start talking about professional gear, the cost of modeling amps is more than tubes. I'd also contest that this is "figured out" - this area is actively researched.
- dmacvicar 6y ago
  Price and weight are close. About $2500. AxeFx III is about ~6.8 Kg. Between a half and a third of a Plexi head or an AC-30 Head. For a stadium band. It makes the stage setup much easier. No cabinets, mics and low stage volume. Each member gets a rack with two units (backup) and you are done. Sound will be always the same. Less likely to fail. For a small band, you don't need the bulky rack editions. You get the same sound quality in pedal form (Helix, FM-3, etc). It can be carried in a bag. In both cases, the sound engineer has an easier job. You plug your devices directly to the mixer/Front of House. Most musicians program few pre-defined rigs, but a device like this gives you not only one sound, but the sound of ~300 amplifier models including some rare collection items.
  - qppo 6y ago
    Yes you have more control, it also sounds worse. They have advantages in live reproduction, yet you still see tubes mic'd up in the studio. And for a small band even if you have a FoH mix, it's going to sound better out of a 40W combo than through whatever PA your vocalist dragged along. But that's just my opinion. Digital models do a good job in a vacuum (no pun intended). They do a very poor job of modeling how a guitar and FX chain load and drive the preamp of an real tube amplifier (which is really difficult to capture in either white or black box models). That's also a key to getting lush and evocative ranges of tone from a single configuration. Just speaking as a player, I don't really fiddle with my tube amps all that much. The tone changes come from dynamics of my hands and controls over my pickup volume controls, and it's accentuated by my drive and boost pedals. That kind of play doesn't translate well to modeling amps which don't have the low headroom, lower impedance inputs of a pure tube stage. I don't need 300 different amp models, I need 1 amp model for 300 tones.
arduinomancer 6y ago
> The most popular guitar amps now are all solid state Ehh only on the lower end. Most mid to pro musicians still use tube amps. The modeling amps are good but tube still sounds better.
irscott 6y ago
The idea that this technology is "the most popular" is incorrect as is the idea that tube amps are unreliable. The katana and fender GT sound "fine" but the assertion that they can model traditional tube amps well enough for stage use is also a little suspect. Those specific amps sound thin and lifeless compared to the amps they attempt to model. Where these types of amps shine is that they're lighter and you can have a more consistent sound at lower volumes. For a person in their house who isn't really worried about having a specific sound or may not even know the difference between british and american voiced amps these are great options. Also the volume issue only comes into play when we're thinking about gain and compression. My fender Deluxe Reverb sounds amazing at low volume. The AxeFx and helix stuff is a little better but that stuff is way more expensive than your average tube amp, particularly on the used market. Your average 40 watt tube amp from fender, vox, marshall, etc will run you $700-$1500 while these high end modellers can easily be $2500+. As far as tube amps being unreliable goes I'd love to see some sources on that. I've played fender amps from the 50s and marshalls from the 60s that sound every bit as good today as they did when they were made. I work in very high end music retail where I'm fortunate enough to get to play all kinds of new and very old gear. I can confidently say that modelling is getting better and has drastically improved in the last 20 years but still has a ways to go if it's going to completely replace tube amps for stage and studio use.
- fuzzfactor 6y ago
  Modeling can also give you an incredible pallette at your fingertips. But the same fingertips can not even be trained to fully master the pallette available from a simple amp like a vintage Champ or Bassman without even reverb or tremolo. Careful choice of guitar, pickups, strings, tubes and speakers each broaden the pallette and build on each other and these are all user selectable, just nowhere near as convenient as changing digital models. Also most vintage pro amps in excellent working condition or fully restored are more reliable than the cabinets, whose reliability mainly depended on how high it fell off the truck from. You're supposed to have spare guitars, cables & strings anyway, plus tubes and an extension speaker to avoid show-stoppers if you only have one amp. Transistor amps shouldn't be turned on in direct sun either, but they can last quite a bit longer before expiration. We had a very talented guitarist locally who had a great sounding Line 6 100 watt 2x12 which lasted a long time, but replaced by an older, longer-lasting Twin Reverb he regained a certain stonk that you could tell had an effect on the dance floor.

by w0mbat 6y ago

MrBuddyCasino 6y ago

Is latency an issue?

joeel84 6y ago
Yes.
mhh__ 6y ago
Latency can be an issue if you are playing through a desktop computer or laptop, but its very manageable (for the most part) if you set up your buffers right. I have never ever noticed any latency issues with any physical hardware, even for equipment from years ago.
- o-__-o 6y ago
  A lot of hardware audio interfaces were usb2 which demands cpu time as the system has to poll the usb device rather than act on an interrupt. This caused very low latencies to basically never work without dropouts. I can distinguish a 20-30ms latency and above that it becomes too difficult to ply anything meaningful. Even my semi-pro tascam interface could only sample between 11-14ms. Faster cpus over the last 5 years and ultimately Usb3 solved the polling problem but is just now picking up traction in newer devices due to the usb-c connector.
  - klodolph 6y ago
    The complaint about CPU time is interesting—surely the whole point is that you want to spend CPU time more often? Then again, it’s been a long time (15 years?) since I’ve seen dropouts, and I’m definitely using USB2 (not USB3) and low buffer sizes (more like 10-15ms, not 20-30ms).
  - MrBuddyCasino 6y ago
    Interesting, I thought in general polling was lower-latency at the cost of higher CPU utilization. But maybe its not really true for USB.
keyth72 6y ago
Second Yes. I would not play this at a live gig myself, but it does run fine on my Acer laptop with i5 processor, which is not meant for serious audio processing. If you try it and are getting latency issues, try adjusting the sample rate. Also the stand alone app seems to run much slower than the VST plugin, but most people interested in this I expect would use the plugin anyway.
- o-__-o 6y ago
  Get a usb3/usb-c audio interface. Focusrite or presonus are the current favorites. Usb3 does not have the polling problem which cactuses dropouts. Another simple fix is switching to a real-time kernel when using jack (big assumption you are using Linux heh)
hannasanarion 6y ago
For purpose-made hardware, basically never. If you're doing all of the emulation and signal processing on a general-purpose computer, then sure, you often run into latency problems, and part of the set up process for those software tools is latency calibration. The one that I use when at my desktop, Guitarix, is very conservative with its latency, defaulting to like 500 milliseconds, I turn it down to 20-30 or so and it still functions on my hardware and you can't tell the difference: it's the same time delay as playing through a speaker 20 feet away.

dyeje 6y ago

> The most popular guitar amps now are all solid state Maybe on the low end of the market, but tube amps still reign supreme for most serious players.

notahacker 6y ago
There are plenty of touring musicians using Kemper digital models of their tube amps or Helix/AxeFX
- hashkb 6y ago
  I just returned a Helix because of lackluster... everything. I'll try modelers again in a few years. I think of tube amps a lot like I think about Vim.
  - 52-6F-62 6y ago
    I want to preface by saying I love playing with music instrumentation and other audio software and it’s long been on my list to learn more to play with ideas much like OP so hats off to Keith for releasing this software. But as far as guitar instrumentation goes— I have a lot of respect for good solid state amplifiers—think Roland Jazz Chorus—that are not modelling another sound but a very intensively tuned original instrument. As for physical, electrical amplifiers versus a software emulated version I just can’t see the point in using one outside of the [potential] convenience. Now, if your goal is to take that signal and twist it into something new altogether that’s different. But if I want to sound like an AC30 I don’t know why I would use something like hats just trying to sound like an AC30 versus something that is and AC30. Lacklustre has always been my experience. Like leaving a tube amp too quiet—not saturating the tubes. It just tends to sound dull.
    - hashkb 6y ago
      Outside of "convenience" they're attractive for the flexible routing and parameterization. I can only realistically deploy 4 tube screamers and a handful of delays before someone notices they're all set almost exactly the same way. I'd love to replace the combinatorics with presets, and although MIDI routing is an option, it sure would be nice if a compact reliable digital solution sounded good. So that's why I want it to be good... But it's not.

qppo 6y ago

A decent tube amp is not significantly more expensive than a decent modeling amp, particularly considering the used market. They're also just as "bulky" as a solid state amp - the heaviest components are the power transformer and drivers. When you start talking about professional gear, the cost of modeling amps is more than tubes. I'd also contest that this is "figured out" - this area is actively researched.

dmacvicar 6y ago
Price and weight are close. About $2500. AxeFx III is about ~6.8 Kg. Between a half and a third of a Plexi head or an AC-30 Head. For a stadium band. It makes the stage setup much easier. No cabinets, mics and low stage volume. Each member gets a rack with two units (backup) and you are done. Sound will be always the same. Less likely to fail. For a small band, you don't need the bulky rack editions. You get the same sound quality in pedal form (Helix, FM-3, etc). It can be carried in a bag. In both cases, the sound engineer has an easier job. You plug your devices directly to the mixer/Front of House. Most musicians program few pre-defined rigs, but a device like this gives you not only one sound, but the sound of ~300 amplifier models including some rare collection items.
- qppo 6y ago
  Yes you have more control, it also sounds worse. They have advantages in live reproduction, yet you still see tubes mic'd up in the studio. And for a small band even if you have a FoH mix, it's going to sound better out of a 40W combo than through whatever PA your vocalist dragged along. But that's just my opinion. Digital models do a good job in a vacuum (no pun intended). They do a very poor job of modeling how a guitar and FX chain load and drive the preamp of an real tube amplifier (which is really difficult to capture in either white or black box models). That's also a key to getting lush and evocative ranges of tone from a single configuration. Just speaking as a player, I don't really fiddle with my tube amps all that much. The tone changes come from dynamics of my hands and controls over my pickup volume controls, and it's accentuated by my drive and boost pedals. That kind of play doesn't translate well to modeling amps which don't have the low headroom, lower impedance inputs of a pure tube stage. I don't need 300 different amp models, I need 1 amp model for 300 tones.

arduinomancer 6y ago

> The most popular guitar amps now are all solid state Ehh only on the lower end. Most mid to pro musicians still use tube amps. The modeling amps are good but tube still sounds better.

irscott 6y ago

The idea that this technology is "the most popular" is incorrect as is the idea that tube amps are unreliable. The katana and fender GT sound "fine" but the assertion that they can model traditional tube amps well enough for stage use is also a little suspect. Those specific amps sound thin and lifeless compared to the amps they attempt to model. Where these types of amps shine is that they're lighter and you can have a more consistent sound at lower volumes. For a person in their house who isn't really worried about having a specific sound or may not even know the difference between british and american voiced amps these are great options. Also the volume issue only comes into play when we're thinking about gain and compression. My fender Deluxe Reverb sounds amazing at low volume. The AxeFx and helix stuff is a little better but that stuff is way more expensive than your average tube amp, particularly on the used market. Your average 40 watt tube amp from fender, vox, marshall, etc will run you $700-$1500 while these high end modellers can easily be $2500+. As far as tube amps being unreliable goes I'd love to see some sources on that. I've played fender amps from the 50s and marshalls from the 60s that sound every bit as good today as they did when they were made. I work in very high end music retail where I'm fortunate enough to get to play all kinds of new and very old gear. I can confidently say that modelling is getting better and has drastically improved in the last 20 years but still has a ways to go if it's going to completely replace tube amps for stage and studio use.

fuzzfactor 6y ago
Modeling can also give you an incredible pallette at your fingertips. But the same fingertips can not even be trained to fully master the pallette available from a simple amp like a vintage Champ or Bassman without even reverb or tremolo. Careful choice of guitar, pickups, strings, tubes and speakers each broaden the pallette and build on each other and these are all user selectable, just nowhere near as convenient as changing digital models. Also most vintage pro amps in excellent working condition or fully restored are more reliable than the cabinets, whose reliability mainly depended on how high it fell off the truck from. You're supposed to have spare guitars, cables & strings anyway, plus tubes and an extension speaker to avoid show-stoppers if you only have one amp. Transistor amps shouldn't be turned on in direct sun either, but they can last quite a bit longer before expiration. We had a very talented guitarist locally who had a great sounding Line 6 100 watt 2x12 which lasted a long time, but replaced by an older, longer-lasting Twin Reverb he regained a certain stonk that you could tell had an effect on the dance floor.