6 ms·

> 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.

by dyeje 6y ago

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.
      - 52-6F-62 6y ago
        Sure, I hear you— but then are you really looking for good modelling? Or are you looking for an entirely novel sound processing that just drew inspiration from the physical devices? I understand the latter. I don't understand the former... except for maybe as an exercise.
  - TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
    The Helix is honestly pretty awful, so I'm not surprised you returned it. I spent some time auditioning modellers a few years ago, and my reaction to the Helix was "LOL! Seriously??" The Kemper is far more credible, with the AxeFX system and and some of the better amp sim plugins you can buy from (say) UAD following behind.
    - dmacvicar 6y ago
      How did you audition them? what did you use in addition to the modeler?
    - hashkb 6y ago
      There's only one criterion for success- blind taste test with my current rig. At this point I need mathematical proof or someone to risk something (money) for me to try again. No offense, but other people's ears have always let me down.
dmacvicar 6y ago
Many prominent artists are touring with modelling amps for years now. https://www.fractalaudio.com/artists/ https://www.fractalaudio.com/artists/ There are many advantages. Less maintenance, lower stage volumes, better for in-ear-monitoring use, sound consistency, less weight to carry, and the ability to explore hundred of amps sounds with a single device eg. check https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Amplifier_models_list https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Amplifier...
- whiddershins 6y ago
  Linking to an endorsement page doesn’t tell the whole story. I would be pretty surprised if Metallica were using the technology you are describing. They have an extremely consistent setup that has worked for decades and an effectively infinite budget. That’s just one concrete example. I think a lot of the comments in this thread are missing the fact that if a player thinks a thing has irreproducable properties, they may be happier and more creative while using it.
  - dmacvicar 6y ago
    Metallica IS using this in every single concert they have played after they experimented with them in the Antartica show. AxeFX II, but I saw AxeFX III in a recent photo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6k2ghtbhoU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6k2ghtbhoU 3:09-7:32. Megadeth is also using AxeFX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7vzOjzn0Mw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7vzOjzn0Mw And from there you can extrapolate how common they are.
ryanSrich 6y ago
Yeah I didn’t get this statement. I only play tube amps, and most guitarists I know only play tube amps. I actually don’t know anyone that plays a modeling amp. Maybe they’re more popular outside of my sphere, but even with popular YouTube guitars players, they all play tube amps. Mostly Fender.
- dmacvicar 6y ago
  I never saw the point of getting a real tube amp unless you play exclusively in a studio or rehearsal room. The volume required to crank and get the best of it sounds it makes it too loud for almost any residential area. One of the best features of modeling amps is that you can get the sound of a cranked amp set at a high volume, with low/moderate real volume or even with head-phones. Even in a rehearsal room, real amps are too loud and make the band members start competing for volume. Low stage volume and in-ear-monitoring allows me to play better.
  - ryanSrich 6y ago
    Well the point is the tone. Modeling amps have come a long way, but nothing compares to the real thing. Of course, most people won’t be able to tell the difference, but many musicians tend to prefer analog.
    - mysterydip 6y ago
      If most people (ie your audience) can't tell the difference, then why go with it?
      - klodolph 6y ago
        Take it as a fact that you’ll commonly have higher standards than your audience. This applies to software, actors, musicians, whatever. That, and your experience affects your performance. It’s easier for an actor to act in a room full of props and other actors, versus a green screen. Easier for a musician to make music with the gear and tone that they prefer.

> 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.

by 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.
    - 52-6F-62 6y ago
      Sure, I hear you— but then are you really looking for good modelling? Or are you looking for an entirely novel sound processing that just drew inspiration from the physical devices? I understand the latter. I don't understand the former... except for maybe as an exercise.
- TheOtherHobbes 6y ago
  The Helix is honestly pretty awful, so I'm not surprised you returned it. I spent some time auditioning modellers a few years ago, and my reaction to the Helix was "LOL! Seriously??" The Kemper is far more credible, with the AxeFX system and and some of the better amp sim plugins you can buy from (say) UAD following behind.
  - dmacvicar 6y ago
    How did you audition them? what did you use in addition to the modeler?
  - hashkb 6y ago
    There's only one criterion for success- blind taste test with my current rig. At this point I need mathematical proof or someone to risk something (money) for me to try again. No offense, but other people's ears have always let me down.

dmacvicar 6y ago

Many prominent artists are touring with modelling amps for years now. https://www.fractalaudio.com/artists/ https://www.fractalaudio.com/artists/ There are many advantages. Less maintenance, lower stage volumes, better for in-ear-monitoring use, sound consistency, less weight to carry, and the ability to explore hundred of amps sounds with a single device eg. check https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Amplifier_models_list https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Amplifier...

whiddershins 6y ago
Linking to an endorsement page doesn’t tell the whole story. I would be pretty surprised if Metallica were using the technology you are describing. They have an extremely consistent setup that has worked for decades and an effectively infinite budget. That’s just one concrete example. I think a lot of the comments in this thread are missing the fact that if a player thinks a thing has irreproducable properties, they may be happier and more creative while using it.
- dmacvicar 6y ago
  Metallica IS using this in every single concert they have played after they experimented with them in the Antartica show. AxeFX II, but I saw AxeFX III in a recent photo. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6k2ghtbhoU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P6k2ghtbhoU 3:09-7:32. Megadeth is also using AxeFX. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7vzOjzn0Mw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O7vzOjzn0Mw And from there you can extrapolate how common they are.

ryanSrich 6y ago

Yeah I didn’t get this statement. I only play tube amps, and most guitarists I know only play tube amps. I actually don’t know anyone that plays a modeling amp. Maybe they’re more popular outside of my sphere, but even with popular YouTube guitars players, they all play tube amps. Mostly Fender.

dmacvicar 6y ago
I never saw the point of getting a real tube amp unless you play exclusively in a studio or rehearsal room. The volume required to crank and get the best of it sounds it makes it too loud for almost any residential area. One of the best features of modeling amps is that you can get the sound of a cranked amp set at a high volume, with low/moderate real volume or even with head-phones. Even in a rehearsal room, real amps are too loud and make the band members start competing for volume. Low stage volume and in-ear-monitoring allows me to play better.
- ryanSrich 6y ago
  Well the point is the tone. Modeling amps have come a long way, but nothing compares to the real thing. Of course, most people won’t be able to tell the difference, but many musicians tend to prefer analog.
  - mysterydip 6y ago
    If most people (ie your audience) can't tell the difference, then why go with it?
    - klodolph 6y ago
      Take it as a fact that you’ll commonly have higher standards than your audience. This applies to software, actors, musicians, whatever. That, and your experience affects your performance. It’s easier for an actor to act in a room full of props and other actors, versus a green screen. Easier for a musician to make music with the gear and tone that they prefer.